How to interpret AGPL v3 terms?

Question

Licenses for software and other works

There is a product (hereinafter referred to as the "product") distributed by the AGPL. Do I understand correctly that an organization can freely use it for internal needs, including including it in its software used for internal needs without the need to open the source of its software? Here she acts as the end consumer?
If she uses the product in commercial software, does she have to open source the commercial software?
If the sources of commercial software are open, is it possible to sell this software without ties and agreements with the author of the product that is distributed through the AGPL and used in this commercial software?
Phew, sort of uttered, I hope the essence of the question is clear.

Answer 1

IANAL. TINLA.
> Do I understand correctly that the organization can freely use it for internal needs
? Yes. However, understand that the difference between the (GNU) AGPL and the GNU (L) GPL is precisely in narrowing the understanding of these very “internal needs” to the expected limits - using a program as an externally accessible server is no longer considered internal use.
> including in your software used for internal needs
Yes.
> without having to open source your software?
Yes. (Although I draw your attention to the fact that there is no such term as “open source”, but it’s hard for me to think of what you could put into it so that the answer is different.)
> Here she acts as an end user?
By the most commonly used definition, the end consumer is someone who purchases goods and services to satisfy their personal needs. That is, the people. That is, a manufacturing company cannot be by definition. But it doesn't matter in the context of your questions.
> If she uses the product in commercial software, does she have to open source the commercial software?
The GNU licenses make no difference between "commercial" programs and others.
> If commercial software sources are open, is it possible to sell this software without ties and agreements with the author of the product that is distributed through the AGPL and used in this commercial software?
Any free software can be sold. And this is not "without an agreement", but with one - it's just already in your pocket.
As for the source code, yes, in order to sell a program under GNU copyleft licenses in a non-original (“object”) form, you need to have the source code corresponding to it, and deal with them in one of the agreed ways.

Answer 2

Tell me, inside the paid software we are going to use a library that is under the AGPL
. Does this mean that I have to make my software open source?