web services are proprietary, user-subjugating
The free/proprietary distinction is for copies of programs. If you are
talking about Google's JavaScript that is copied in your RAM and that your
Web browser executes, then yes, it is proprietary, user-subjugating...
when they are not Aferro GPL licensed.
... but you are apparently talking about code that is remotely executed. It
is indeed where the GNU Affero GPL makes a difference. Google's software
that it is the only one to execute is "trivially free": there is one single
copy and its owner (Google here) has the four essential freedoms.
The AGPL is nicer than the GPL... for developers. For users, both licenses
are the same. In particular, "the GNU Affero GPL does not address the
problem of Service as a Software Substitute (SaaSS)":
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-affero-gpl.html
Now, not all Google services are SaaS: the Web search engine, GMail or
YouTube are not SaaS, i.e., they do not provide services that you could
achieve alone, on your own computer. They distribute proprietary JavaScript,
which is unjust. They are serious privacy concerns. But they are not SaaS.
And, again, even if they were SaaS, the GNU Affero GPL would not solve this
problem: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-serve
BTW, Google forbids software licensed under AGPL.
What do you mean? Do Google Play's Terms of Service prevent AGPL software to
be distributed on Google Play? Apparently not:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.nextcloud.client
