Ever since mold relicensed from AGPL to MIT (as part of mold 2.0 release), the worldwide need for making another fast linker has been greatly reduced, so I wasn't expecting a project like this to appear. And definitely wasn't expecting it to already be 2x faster than mold in some cases. Will keep an eye on this project to see how it evolves, best of luck to the author.
Why does AGPL Vs MIT matter for a linker?
Corps don't want to have to release the source code for their internal forks. They could also potentially be sued for everything they link using it because the linked binaries could be "derivative works" according to a judge who doesn't know anything.
I think you should get new lawyers if this is their understanding of how software licenses work.
See for example
https://opensource.google/documentation/reference/using/agpl...> Code licensed under the GNU Affero General Public License (AGPL) MUST NOT be used at Google.
Is it? Because open source tools re-licensing themselves to be more permissive would seem to indicate whose loss it really is.