[zokier]

> If you want to offer MongoDB as a service, you can still do so free of charge, as long as the service infrastructure is also made openly available, right?

The license text is worded as such that it is basically impossible to comply with.

> OSI’s “MongoDB isn’t open source anymore” campaign work so well.

It is hardly OSIs campaign. Pretty much all major organizations involved in FOSS licensing have rejected sspl. For example this is Fedoras stance:

> Fedora considers the Server Side Public License (v1) to be a Non-Free license. It is the belief of Fedora that the SSPL is intentionally crafted to be aggressively discriminatory towards a specific class of users. Additionally, it seems clear that the intent of the license author is to cause Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt towards commercial users of software under that license. To consider the SSPL to be "Free" or "Open Source" causes that shadow to be cast across all other licenses in the FOSS ecosystem, even though none of them carry that risk.