I mean, that's not entirely relevant in the context of this discussion. That file tells users not to use the software if they don't agree to the license, but section 9 of both the GPL and AGPL 3.0 say that a license is not required to receive and run a copy of the program, and copyright does not limit use in the first place. Actually, even the SSPL contains that clause. So the text in question is unambiguously inconsistent with all of those licenses.
The debate over whether the limitations on using AGPL or SSPL software in a SaaS product in certain ways without making your own source available meet various free software definitions is not really relevant to the discussion of this particular text.