I’m pretty sure when the license is revoked, that includes the license for using it as well.
The article doesn’t seem to state if they are redistributing it or not, but I’ll take your word for it. Without being a user of the infringing product, I’m not able to tell whose premises the server they SSH’d into is on.
I’m pretty sure when the license is revoked, that includes the license for using it as well.
The article doesn’t seem to state if they are redistributing it or not, but I’ll take your word for it. Without being a user of the infringing product, I’m not able to tell whose premises the server they SSH’d into is on.
IIRC the AGPL says you don't need a license to use the code, but you do to modify the code, which then triggers the network interaction requirements.
The AGPL network interaction provisions trigger on modification, not redistribution, so you can violate it without redistribution.
Yes, which is the point of AGPL.