"Yes. Of course. Why else would Canonical have used the GPL for the software they'd developed?"
They don't. They use AGPL for most of the newer stuff, and do so specifically because they want to make money of cloud services. They want to control those services, too.
I'm not sure what led to the conclusion you have that Canonical is a social enterprise (other than their marketing copy), any more than redhat (which also release software on the GPL) is a social enterprise.
Canonical, from what I see, tries to take advantage of this position (in the same way redhat used to), but I see absolutely nothing to suggest they are any different from any previous company in this space.
If you are going to suggest they are different than every previous company, i would suggest that you bear the burden of showing that.
They don't. They use AGPL for most of the newer stuff, and do so specifically because they want to make money of cloud services. They want to control those services, too.
I'm not sure what led to the conclusion you have that Canonical is a social enterprise (other than their marketing copy), any more than redhat (which also release software on the GPL) is a social enterprise.
Canonical, from what I see, tries to take advantage of this position (in the same way redhat used to), but I see absolutely nothing to suggest they are any different from any previous company in this space.
If you are going to suggest they are different than every previous company, i would suggest that you bear the burden of showing that.