There's a pretty large gap between "$5,000 a year is reasonable" and "AGPLv3 is usable" (or any GPL variant).
Speaking personally, the overwhelming majority of projects I work on can't ever go near GPL, because the project itself does not want to catch the awful GPL virus. Even open-source projects, nearly all of the ones I touch are not GPL but are some other, much more sane, license like Apache, BSD, or MIT.
No one here is interested in reading inflammatory posts about tiresome old flame wars. You call it an awful virus, I call proprietary licenses a distasteful cancer. You call it insane, I call it entitled attitude to other peoples work.
At work and private life I don't include other peoples copyrighted work if I don't have a license for it. It's one simple rule. If I don't want to agree to the license because its too expensive or it put requirements on me which I refuse (like NDA's), then I have a simple choose to make. I can chose not use it, I can implement it myself, or I can hire someone else to do it.
You're arguing the wrong point. I'm not advocating for ignoring licenses, and I have no idea why you think I would. My point is entirely that the OP's claim that $5,000 a year if you can't use the AGPL is absolutely fucking stupid. There's tons of reasons why you can't use the AGPL and can't afford $5,000 a year. So go take your sanctimony elsewhere.
If you don't want to pay the price and refuse to accept the conditions in which it is given to you for free, then tough luck!. Don't come to me crying about how you want it for free while adding your own license on top because your work is special.
You are angry and lashing which is clouding your ability to comprehend what people saying to you. This is a common trait with people who has strong religious attitude towards licenses, and demonstrate the reason why flame war topics never produce anything productive on HN.
