> It just so happens that empowering the user also empowers competitors.

IMHO copyleft licences are better for the user and permissive licences are better for competitors. Still people keep going with permissive licences.

Ehhh, Amazon offers a hosted Grafana service, which is AGPL. I'm not so sure that.

Which means that they have to share their changes to Grafana, doesn't it?

The LWN thread says that they don't, but have separate proprietary licensing and co-marketing agreements with Grafana Labs.

https://lwn.net/Articles/1019686/#CommAnchor1019710

Thanks that interesting!

And in this case it means that it's not AGPL, but proprietary. Which kind of proves my point: they are apparently paying Grafana Labs to avoid the constraints of AGPL. If Grafana was permissive, they would surely not pay.

That's not what I'm getting at.

Amazon hosting Grafana means it's not only "permissive licences are better for competitors".

Copyleft licenses don't present obstacle to competitors that people seem to believe.

The OSD is basically a copy of the DFSG btw

You wouldn’t use the ten commandments as your only moral guide.

The landscape has changed. Google, Amazon, and microsoft are actively trying to destroy open source business models. Don’t let the leopards eat your face because you were too attached to your ideology.

> Don’t let the leopards eat your face because you were too attached to your ideology.

You're conflating ideologies. User-focused ideology doesn't care about business models. Leopards aren't eating their faces. They're perfectly fine where they are.

Business model focused ideology might care, but the AGPL exists and meets Debian's requirements. Those who care can choose to use it, or not, as they wish.