What the heck? You can get an AGPL linker for free, or pay for a non-AGPL one. This type of thing is standard in OS. Selling a product isn't extortion.
I don't recall seeing a single developer tool where the output was anything other than fully under the copyright of the author of the input files (or fully liberally licensed in the case of additional code objects).
Selling is not extortion, no. That's not what I claimed. But did you read the quote?
> mold stays in AGPL, but _we claim AGPL propagates to the linker's output_ [...] I don't know if this claim will hold in court, but just buying a sold license would be much easier than using mold in an AGPL-incompatible way and challenging the claim in court.
