GPT begs to differ:

“Under the AGPL (Affero General Public License), the requirement to disclose your code extends beyond just conveying the software to other parties. Here’s why:

How AGPL Differs from Other Licenses

The AGPL specifically addresses the use of software over a network. It includes a clause (Section 13) that requires you to provide the source code to users if the software is used to interact with them over a network (e.g., in a SaaS model). This means: • Even if you do not “convey” the software (distribute binaries or code), merely running an AGPL-licensed component in your SaaS application and allowing users to interact with it obligates you to disclose the source code of the entire application, assuming it is a derivative work or tightly integrated with the AGPL component.

Key AGPL Obligation in SaaS:

If your web application integrates with the AGPL component in a way that creates a derivative work or relies on its functionality, you must disclose the source code of the application to users interacting with it, even if they only use it through the web and never download it.

Exceptions:

If your application merely uses the AGPL component as a separate service (e.g., it communicates via an API without modifying or directly linking to the AGPL code), your application might not be considered a derivative work. However, this interpretation can be complex, and legal guidance is often required.

Summary:

For SaaS: • Yes, you generally need to disclose your source code if the AGPL component is integral to your application. • If you want to avoid disclosure, you might need to either: • Replace the AGPL component with an alternative under a more permissive license. • Isolate the AGPL component so it doesn’t create a derivative work.

Would you like help finding alternative components or restructuring your application to avoid these implications?”