There are several and I should definitely find the time to write something about them (and maybe debate with #RMS about them).

One evident and recent one has been shown by the #GitHub #Copilot affaire: code is data too, but the #GPL does not require sharing the output of such kind of compilation.

But there are many other ways that the knowledge contained in or derived by #AGPL software can be privatized.

Indeed AGPL does not prevent embrace, extend, extinguish tactics.

It may well keep in the commons the derivative works of a specific software but does not affect any software built on top of it, in particular if its services are provided through standard protocols.

Also the Oracle vs Google has shown that any innovative API gifted to commons by #FreeSoftware hackers would be taken by #BigTech corporations and turned into exploitation tool: if it happened to Oracle's Java API, it will happen to any Free Software that affect the interests of people running such corporations.

Not to mention complexity! Or patents!

The #HackingLicense address all of this.
In includes a copyright and patent assignment TO THE USER, both conditioned to the preservation in the commons of both derivative works AND works dependent on it.

It's not a #copyleft designed to protect priviledge but to build a free cultural corpus of commons that belong to the whole humanity and cannot be turned into exploitation of free labor.

@ekaitz_zarraga@Pixificial@craigmaloney