http://groups.google.com/group/google-code-hosting/browse_th...
1. It violates the FSF's "Free Software Definition". Freedom 0 is the freedom to run the program for any purpose. They explain this as:
The freedom to run the program means the freedom
for any kind of person or organization to use it
on any kind of computer system, for any kind of
overall job and purpose, without being required to
communicate about it with the developer or any
other specific entity. In this freedom, it is
the user's purpose that matters, not the
developer's purpose; you as a user are free
to run the program for your purposes, and if
you distribute it to someone else, she is then
free to run it for her purposes, but you are
not entitled to impose your purposes on her.
If I, as a user, wish to run an AGPL program as a daemon on my system to generate forms that get presented to customers and that processes the input the customers type into the forms, I'm the user. AGPL requires that I communicate about the program with the customers. This violates Freedom 0.2. It seems at odds with #10 of the OSI Open Source Definition ("No provision of the license may be predicated on any individual technology or style of interface").
3. It prohibits something that is allowed by copyright law. Pretty much every other free/open license is based on granting permission for you to do things that would not be allowed under copyright law, without requiring you to give up any of your rights allowed by copyright as the owner of a particular copy lawfully made. To put it succinctly, AGPL is a EULA.
That the FSF accepted AGPL shows a major breakdown in their idealism.
[0] http://code.google.com/p/support/issues/detail?id=4297#c6
"....the TL;DR version is that we think we've....."
It's good to see them stepping forward to allow the use of these newer licenses on the site.