No, the AGPL has a different problem. The FSF has been misleading everyone into *believing* it has an anti-SaaS usage restriction, but it doesn't.
What it does have is an anti-SaaS *modification* restriction, which bites people a very different way. It is indeed a pure copyright license, but also nonfree due to this fact.
It is entirely safe to install and run AGPL software as-is as an end user, and you don't need to take any steps to offer source code to anyone. However, it is extremely difficult to modify AGPL software and abide by the terms of its license. ~All Linux distributions shipping AGPL software are *themselves* in violation (not their users) if they have any AGPL packages they apply patches to without a source offer URL/mechanism update (or creation, if it does not exist already). This happens in practice extremely often.
More detail here: https://social.treehouse.systems/@marcan/112973100810673010
Hector Martin /
npub1qk…9azpx
2024-08-18 12:56:01
in reply to nevent1q…r6rd
Author Public Key
npub1qk9x6yrvten3jqyvundn7exggm90fxf9yfarj5eaz25yd7aty8hqe9azpxPublished at
2024-08-18 12:56:01Event JSON
{
"id": "211389a2a04877b07d37df2100d03922e3ccaa80185a2da68957e240129f0482",
"pubkey": "058a6d106c5e6719008ce4db3f64c846caf49925227a39533d12a846fbab21ee",
"created_at": 1723985761,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"p",
"d719273d61c0bbb0452e0020e7b73fc618ede201126e5814c19c329978027a6b"
],
[
"e",
"5a5a8956d02acc9d3584a534afe666d3c5a8f4bc27cdb8f3472d1319d536779c",
"",
"root",
"058a6d106c5e6719008ce4db3f64c846caf49925227a39533d12a846fbab21ee"
],
[
"p",
"058a6d106c5e6719008ce4db3f64c846caf49925227a39533d12a846fbab21ee"
],
[
"e",
"c3b8aa6ae89d906a1773b4ddc2c0f1b4d993710ee607a4fdc8bb11359ad838c9",
"",
"reply",
"5e2411ce808abf336a686e4340b6df47a1267ed8e9852ecea318b2c8bbffc55c"
],
[
"p",
"5e2411ce808abf336a686e4340b6df47a1267ed8e9852ecea318b2c8bbffc55c"
],
[
"proxy",
"https://social.treehouse.systems/@marcan/112983130892690888",
"web"
],
[
"p",
"0ca9ad85da48d60358f0dac613e13de175341de71b566ffb4635b09f598f0c3b"
],
[
"proxy",
"https://social.treehouse.systems/users/marcan/statuses/112983130892690888",
"activitypub"
],
[
"L",
"pink.momostr"
],
[
"l",
"pink.momostr.activitypub:https://social.treehouse.systems/users/marcan/statuses/112983130892690888",
"pink.momostr"
],
[
"-"
]
],
"content": "No, the AGPL has a different problem. The FSF has been misleading everyone into *believing* it has an anti-SaaS usage restriction, but it doesn't.\n\nWhat it does have is an anti-SaaS *modification* restriction, which bites people a very different way. It is indeed a pure copyright license, but also nonfree due to this fact.\n\nIt is entirely safe to install and run AGPL software as-is as an end user, and you don't need to take any steps to offer source code to anyone. However, it is extremely difficult to modify AGPL software and abide by the terms of its license. ~All Linux distributions shipping AGPL software are *themselves* in violation (not their users) if they have any AGPL packages they apply patches to without a source offer URL/mechanism update (or creation, if it does not exist already). This happens in practice extremely often.\n\nMore detail here: https://social.treehouse.systems/@marcan/112973100810673010",
"sig": "b663a1ceaa35cb06c8e6283d5c58325ed8564ade41ca566caffcb61003b10ef341130ff8ac8fb82742d393101fd06ad5e0e9f89565a3484dc68fd4c28cac7d29"
}