> Guess what, AGPL does that too. Its only 1 paragraph different than GPL.
Yes, and the point is that paragraph is particularly risky and untested.
> Citation needed.
I gave an example.
Yes, and the point is that paragraph is particularly risky and untested.
> Citation needed.
I gave an example.
There's an entire class of tooling to make sure that GPL-tainted software isn't distributed (https://opensource.google/docs/thirdparty/licenses/#restrict...), but because the class of software that Google distributes under the GPL is limited (can you think of any?), this is workable, and such things can be isolated.
That doesn't work if the definition of "distribution" is broadened significantly. Then the derivative work questions (which aren't as cut and dry as you claim) do suddenly matter a lot more.
Amazing the lengths people go to in order to avoid sharing and treating others well! Imagine if they did the opposite: imagine if they just freely shared their source code.