> I mean use your judgement, say you want to do npm install X, do you call your lawyers all the time or use your judgement?

Before starting to use code for my business, I'd check the license, yes. Almost all the time it's a standard one, so I know approximately that yes BSD, MIT, GPL, etc… means. Though I have to be careful about BSD with advertising clause.

Before starting to depend on code for my business, yes I would make sure that I am not violating a license.

Your "only if you decide you need a lawyer" seems to be saying that your opinion is necessarily right. You don't decide if you need a lawyer, you either do or you don't. And you make the right choice or you don't. (and their guidance is right or it isn't)

> Don't do X because Google is doing it, think for yourself and if you consider that you are not sure then ask for an expert.

Sure. You can peruse the AGPL, and if you think your amateur interpretation of this legally untested license does not add unacceptable risk, then you can choose to go ahead with it.

Google got sued for reimplementing an API. And they may lose (currently awaiting the supreme court).

People have been suing much smaller companies for GPL violations. It's a matter of time before someone sues for perceived AGPL violation due to what Google's lawyers are describing.

> My point is if Microsoft says GPL is evil and you believe that and later when MS is open sourcing stuff and contributing to Linux you will have to admit that maybe MS had a giant interest to say that.

Yup. That doesn't mean they're factually wrong. But yes there's the aspect of "It's hard to make someone understand that they are wrong when their income depends on them not understanding it".

But just because someone has a reason to do something, doesn't mean they did it. It's not an argument about correctness.