No, not in the same way at all. GPLv2 was strictly a distribution agreement. If you want to distribute a GPLv2-derived work, you must offer its source to anybod

No, not in the same way at all. GPLv2 was strictly a distribution agreement. If you want to distribute a GPLv2-derived work, you must offer its source to anybody who gets the binary. That's using copyright law; you would normally have no right at all to distribute something copyrighted by somebody else, but they've given you permission to distribute so long as you agree to their distribution terms. AGPL/GPLv3 are usage licenses: it's not a simple matter of agreeing to a license when you're distributing the derived work, but instead you must follow the license whenever you're using the work. AGPL and GPLv3 are completely different beasts from GPLv2; they may fit your needs better, but they aren't the same thing at all.