Are you sure it's correct? It says it's AGPL but the explanation given sounds like what you want is actually the LGPL. AGPL is about what happens if you expose a program as a SaaS and is generally banned from any company due to the "viral" nature i.e. a service that used Mantic would need to be fully open sourced even if the code was never distributed.
LGPL is for libraries: you can use an LGPLd program in proprietary software, but you have to make the source of the LGPLd program with modifications available if you distribute it. It doesn't infect the rest of the program, and it doesn't have any clauses that trigger for SaaS scenarios.
Your current explanation doesn't jive with my understanding the AGPL. For example, you cannot realistically sell a service that incorporates an AGPLd component because it'd require you to open source the entire service.
alt Hacker News
Are you sure it's correct? It says it's AGPL but the explanation given sounds like what you want is actually the LGPL. AGPL is about what happens if you expose a program as a SaaS and is generally banned from any company due to the "viral" nature i.e. a service that used Mantic would need to be fully open sourced even if the code was never distributed.
LGPL is for libraries: you can use an LGPLd program in proprietary software, but you have to make the source of the LGPLd program with modifications available if you distribute it. It doesn't infect the rest of the program, and it doesn't have any clauses that trigger for SaaS scenarios.
Your current explanation doesn't jive with my understanding the AGPL. For example, you cannot realistically sell a service that incorporates an AGPLd component because it'd require you to open source the entire service.