COMPARISON / LICENSE FAMILIES
SSPL vs AGPL compared.
This SSPL vs AGPL comparison sets the two licenses side by side, because enterprises often confuse them. One is open source and one is not, they trigger under different conditions, and only one is likely to intersect your actual use.
In an SSPL vs AGPL comparison the most important distinction comes first: these two licenses are not the same kind of thing. The Server Side Public License is a source available license, not approved by the Open Source Initiative. The GNU Affero General Public License is an approved open source license. They are frequently grouped together because both attach conditions tied to offering software over a network, but they sit on opposite sides of the open source line, and they restrict different behavior. Treating them as interchangeable leads enterprises either to raise a false alarm over the AGPL or to underestimate the reach of the SSPL. This page separates them.
SSPL vs AGPL at a glance
The table summarizes the two licenses on the dimensions enterprises care about. Read it as a starting frame, not a substitute for mapping your own use.
| Dimension | Server Side Public License | GNU AGPL |
|---|---|---|
| Open source? | No. Source available, not approved by the Open Source Initiative. | Yes. Approved open source, strong copyleft. |
| Core condition | Source disclosure when offering the software to others as a service. | Source for network users of modified versions. |
| When it triggers | When you make the software available to third parties as a service. | When you modify the software and let users interact with it over a network. |
| Reach into your code | Broad. Disclosure can reach the programs used to operate the service. | Moderate. Covers the modified work exposed to network users. |
| Internal use only | Condition typically does not trigger. | Condition typically does not trigger for unmodified internal use. |
| Example projects | MongoDB, Elasticsearch and Kibana, Redis (in a dual model). | Various network applications and libraries; an Elasticsearch and Redis open option. |
The Server Side Public License
The Server Side Public License is built around the act of offering software as a service. When you make the licensed software available to third parties as a service, the license attaches a source disclosure condition that reaches beyond the software to the programs used to operate it as a service. That reach is deliberately broad, which is why cloud providers found the license unworkable for a managed offering. For internal use the condition typically does not fire. MongoDB adopted the Server Side Public License in 2018, Elasticsearch and Kibana moved to it alongside the Elastic License in 2021, and Redis adopted it as part of a dual model as of March 2024. The exposure concentrates in companies that host or resell the functionality. The mechanics are covered in the Server Side Public License explained, and the term itself in what is the Server Side Public License.
The GNU AGPL
The GNU Affero General Public License is a genuine open source license, approved by the Open Source Initiative. It is strong copyleft with a network clause: if you modify the software and let users interact with it over a network, you must offer those users the corresponding source under the same terms. The critical point in this comparison is that the AGPL gives you the four freedoms of open source, with a reciprocal obligation attached, while the Server Side Public License restricts a commercial use pattern outright. The AGPL has also become relevant to the relicensing wave as an open option, since Elastic added it for Elasticsearch as of 2024 and Redis added it as of 2025. The detail is in what is the GNU AGPL.
Which license should you worry about?
The answer is the one whose condition intersects your actual use. If you offer the software to third parties as a service, the Server Side Public License is your concern, and its reach into the operating stack makes it the heavier of the two. If you modify an AGPL component and expose it to users over a network, the AGPL is your concern, but it remains open source and its obligation is satisfiable by sharing source. For most enterprises running either license internally and unmodified, neither condition triggers, and the perceived risk is larger than the real one. The way to tell which applies is to map where each license sits in your estate and how each instance is used, which is the foundation of an open source license risk assessment. For the wider frame, read our pillars on relicensing and open source license risk. Interpretation of either license against your use is a question for your own counsel.
COMMON QUESTIONS
Questions buyers ask.
What is the difference between the SSPL and the AGPL?
The Server Side Public License is source available and not approved by the Open Source Initiative. It attaches a broad source disclosure condition when you offer the licensed software to third parties as a service, reaching the programs used to operate the service. The GNU AGPL is an approved open source copyleft license that requires you to offer corresponding source to network users of modified versions. The SSPL restricts a commercial use pattern; the AGPL grants open source freedoms with a copyleft obligation.
Is the SSPL an open source license?
No. The Server Side Public License is source available and is not approved by the Open Source Initiative. Its central condition is source disclosure when you offer the licensed software to third parties as a service, and that condition reaches beyond the software to the programs used to operate it as a service.
Is the AGPL an open source license?
Yes. The GNU Affero General Public License is an approved open source license. It is strong copyleft: if you modify the software and make it available to users over a network, you must offer those users the corresponding source under the same terms.
Which license should my enterprise worry about?
It depends on how you use the software. The Server Side Public License matters most if you offer the software to third parties as a service, which is the use it was written to reach. The AGPL matters most if you modify the software and expose it to users over a network. For most internal use, neither condition triggers, but confirming that requires mapping how each instance is used.
Is this comparison legal advice?
No. This is commercial and licensing risk advisory, not legal advice. For interpretation of how the SSPL or the AGPL applies to your specific use, engage your own counsel.
SEE YOUR EXPOSURE
Find out which license actually reaches you.
A confidential open source license risk assessment. Independent, buyer side, paid only by you.
Not ready to talk? Read the free open source license risk guides first.