Any GPL-like license, yes. But people like to bring up the AGPL because it means "Muhahaha, if they ever run it as a service over the net it means they have to share their source!" as if it has any benefit to their commercial product.
This is an interesting thought exercise. I'm going to postulate that there is a benefit of the AGPL. Lets take a look at a company like JBoss, who may have benefited from the AGPL opposed to the LGPL they use.
A company who wanted to use their products for commercial use must provide a link somewhere on their page to the source, and share any mods. I think this is a big incentive to buy a commerical license from them, as it may look a little less than professional.
Assuming they don't though, and they publish their changes, there is still incentive for them to sign over the copywrite. If they want any backwards compatibility for updates and bug fixes (very important for a runtime platform), they need to. Its that or port everything back over.
