> The license language is almost the same as the AGPL, with changes regarding the SAAS stuff. So, not OSI approved? Yes, but I have issues calling the SSPL a cl

> The license language is almost the same as the AGPL, with changes regarding the SAAS stuff. So, not OSI approved? Yes, but I have issues calling the SSPL a closed license. The AGPL is a nonfree license, despite being erroneously classified as a free one. It is a nonsensical EULA masquerading as a copyright license, and I’m not the only person to point this out. Comparing your nonfree license to the AGPL might seem like an argument in favor of the open-ness of your license, but in reality it is a condemnation. It is insane to think that you should be able to dictate what happens to software that other people run on their own computers that you have given away as free software. The AGPL and SSPL both demand this, for different reasons. Both are nonfree and both are wrong.