Bad Bambu. No.

Bambu Labs is a manufactorer of 3d printers. Those printers are popular.

They offer software to assist in turning 3d models into a format that can be printed. All 3d printers need such software and such software is called a "slicer".

The bambu labs slicer? It is based on AGPL open source software.

Bambu has, though, done a bad thing. They added closed source shit to their slicer. That's not allowed under AGPL. They didn't just do this by accident. They did it intentionally, shifting some of the implementation of the slicer into the cloud.

Others have analyzed this is great detail and you should go read about the details. You don't have to take my word for it. Extensive analysis has been done and the open source pundits are pissed about this, and rightly so.

Bambu response over this? Double down. They claim their online service is being used by people unauthorized to do so because they made open source to use the same HTTP headers.

Really. Bambu is abusing AGPL, and then defending their abuse as "that is our service, we know it is publicly accessible. You may not use it unless you use our closed source shit." Gee guys. That's not how any of this works.

Don't want anyone to use your service that you intentionally made required? Then hand over the source code to the service as you are legally required to do under the AGPL since you fucking integrated it into the slicer as part of the slicer via RPC.

You don't get to carve pieces out of an AGPL program, move them onto a server, and then pretend the licensing obligations magically vanish because the function call crossed HTTP.

Bad Bambu. Those of us who care can and will reverse engineer your illegal bullshit. But by all means keep making yourselves look like abusive idiots.

Slight update. Bambu is tripling down and still standing by their idiotic position that they can add closed source crap into their AGPL forked code because "it's optional."