Open-source licensing and why Lago chose AGPLv3

>Case 1: You fork our code to build your own billing system at your company. It’s awesome and we would be grateful if you could take some time to share your code as well, as it could help other companies. This is _strongly encouraged but not required_, as we understand not all companies can afford to do this.

And later in the quoted explanation of AGPL:

> "If you run a modified program on a server and let other users communicate with it there, your server must also allow them to download the source code corresponding to the modified version running there."

If you fork the project, your company's customers are communicating with your forked code. So are you required to publish your forked changes? Only required to share the fork with paying customers? Or as your desired case states, not required?

(In any case, Lago looks very cool. Thanks for pushing forward the conversation on open licensing!)