Thanks. What about the SSPL is considered discriminating against a field of endeavor? The AGPL is OSI-approved, and as I understand it also has a requirement "

Thanks. What about the SSPL is considered discriminating against a field of endeavor? The AGPL is OSI-approved, and as I understand it also has a requirement "that if you provide the product as a service to others, you must also publicly release any modifications". (Possibly not "as well as the source code of your management layers", but that addition doesn't seem to post any additional problems related to "restrictions of fields of endeavor", I could see a future AGPL adding it, it seems somewhat the spirit of the AGPL). What are the parts of SSPL that differ from AGPL in a way that OSI woudln't aprpove? (The requirement about 'fields of endeavor' can be debated and is one of the currently more debated ones in OSI, but i my memory it goes way back in time to the early days of open source, I think you can probably find Stallman arguing for it before OSI even existed, I don't think it's there for some kind of nefarious reasons inserted by OSI sponsors. But certainly one can disagree with it.) (Here's Stallman against fields of endeavor restrictions from 2013, definitely not pre-dating OSI, but I think this does go way back, and I don't think anyone thinks Stallman's opinions are bought by corporate sponsors, and Stallman is obviously quite influential in ideas about what open source is. https://web.archive.org/web/20130509151342/https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/programs-must-not-limit-freedom-to-run.html https://web.archive.org/web/20130509151342/https://www.gnu.o...)