Click-through licensing is absolutely not required nor recommended for their other licenses, like the GPL. The FSF's oficial position is that the AGPL is a Fre

Click-through licensing is absolutely not required nor recommended for their other licenses, like the GPL. The FSF's oficial position is that the AGPL is a Free Software license, which means it meets all Free Software requirements. This is understandable, as it is their license. I disagree. Freedom 0 is the ability to run the software however you want, and the AGPL imposes requirements here (if you modify it without distributing it then you are required to offer source when you use it, which is a requirement that goes beyond traditional copyright licensing). So while they are correct in saying that click-through licensing is silly for typical permissive/copyleft licenses, I strongly disagree that the AGPL is such a license. It's fundamentally different, and I've already given an example of how being unaware of it has potentially put me in noncompliance. The whole point of click-through not being necessary for users is that for all those other licenses, no restrictions are imposed on end-users as long as direct distribution of the code does not occur. The AGPL imposes such restrictions.