I'm pleased to say that this matter has been resolved unambiguously. Recall above that the ambiguity I pointed out was between the description of the license[0

I'm pleased to say that this matter has been resolved unambiguously. Recall above that the ambiguity I pointed out was between the description of the license[0] and Section 13 of the license itself[1]. RMS has updated the former (see my above quote for the original) to read: > The GNU Affero General Public License is a modified version of the ordinary GNU GPL version 3. It has one added requirement: if you run a modified program on a server and let other users communicate with it there, your server must also allow them to download the source code corresponding to the modified version running there.[0] Here is the applicable part of RMS' reply to me: > Section 13 in the AGPL states the real conditions. The > why-affero-gpl.html has an error. > > It is a general principle that, if the license words are clear, they > override explanation elsewhere. > > As regards the philosophical question, I don't remember any more > why we decided 8 years ago to apply section 13 only to modified > versions. I don't see any strong reason in favor of either choice. > > I corrected the page why-affero-gpl.html. Thanks for reporting the > error. Hope that helps. [0]: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-affero-gpl.html https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-affero-gpl.html [1]: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl.html https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl.html