bibrye

No, software licenses apply to distribution of of software.

The developers made this publicly accessible to users interacting with it remotely through a computer network, in violation of the license. What the developers consider a "release" and their incompetence is irrelevant

It was distributed under AGPL3 to users interacting with it remotely through a computer network. https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.en.html#section13

It's not a matter of whether or not the developers meant to release it.

> I don't think it was intended

We can speculate as to whether the developers made a mistake or not, but it was publicly accessible, putting it in violation of the licensing terms.

It says in the article that it was publicly available

We're facing a supply shortage and you want to eliminate the laws that are keeping tiki torches in stock?!

My health insurance is tied to my employer. I have more to risk than being disliked by building the next e-commerce platform fo r Trump Steaks.