>Well, no. The GNU Affero GPL has a clause that covers this case - if you provide a network service based on AGPLed code then you must provide the source code i

>Well, no. The GNU Affero GPL has a clause that covers this case - if you provide a network service based on AGPLed code then you must provide the source code in a similar way to if you distributed it under a more traditional copyleft license. This is definitely not true. https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl.html https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl.html >Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, if you modify the Program, your modified version must prominently offer all users interacting with it remotely through a computer network (if your version supports such interaction) an opportunity to receive the Corresponding Source of your version by providing access to the Corresponding Source from a network server at no charge, through some standard or customary means of facilitating copying of software. This Corresponding Source shall include the Corresponding Source for any work covered by version 3 of the GNU General Public License that is incorporated pursuant to the following paragraph. There are two things here: 1. People only get access if they access the service. I don't know how this has been tested in court, but to my IANAL ears it means opening a socket to the service. 2. You only have to distribute it if you modify the software. This is nothing to do with using AGPL code as part of the collection of services. And if you don't let users open a socket to the AGPL part then you don't need to release those parts.