EDIT2: http://www.affero.org/oagf.html#How_does_this_license_treat_...
Specifically, the question, "How does this license treat commercial enterprise use over intranets and internal networks?"
Yes.
I was just pointing out that regardless of modification/distribution/whatever, bigco policy is to not allow ANY AGPL code within a 10 mile radius of any computer owned by said company.
The author(s) are free to use AGPL, but there are significant downsides if they care about adoption.
Non-adoption by non-respecters of freedom isn't a downside.
See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13342657 , https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13342804
I'm all for the moral stance, but moral purity in a vacuum is essentially irrelevant. Effective morality is about impact on the world. A morality that's only about the good feelings of the purist is sterile self-indulgence.
Wait, that seems extremely paranoid, even if only meant figuratively... Can you explain the thinking on restricting the use of AGPL'd licensed applications?
These are the legal landmines that BigCos want to avoid, mainly because they're questions that have not really been decided.
So unless you want to offer Alacritty-as-a-Service, you should be just fine with the license.
At a large company, the stakes get large in two ways. One is that all the numbers are just larger. But more important is that an individual decision maker's career success can become dependent on a relatively small number of things. E.g., if a lawyer approves a license that should be fine but actually isn't, that could substantially harm career prospects. It still may be a small problem overall for a major company, but if it means somebody gets fired, those are pretty big stakes.
