Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, if you modify the Program, your modified version must prominently offer all users interacting with it remotely through a computer network (if your version supports such interaction) an opportunity to receive the Corresponding Source of your version by providing access to the Corresponding Source from a network server at no charge, through some standard or customary means of facilitating copying of software. [...]
[...] If your software can interact with users remotely through a computer network, you should also make sure that it provides a way for users to get its source. For example, if your program is a web application, its interface could display a "Source" link that leads users to an archive of the code. There are many ways you could offer source, and different solutions will be better for different programs; see section 13 for the specific requirements. [...]
In this correct to state that the main difference in the terms and conditions is therefore limited to Section 13? or are there any other textual differences that should be considered?
If this is correct, would it be correct to consider that the interpretation of the AGPLv3 can be based on any interpretation of the GPLv3 that I could make plus whatever interpretation I can do for this addition to the AGPLv3 in section 13?
If 2. and 3. are correct and that I use
unmodifiedcode licensed under the AGPLv3, would it be correct to consider that the terms of the GPLv3 and the terms of the AGPLv3 are then essentially the same in this
unmodifiedcase? And that therefore any guideline or interpretation of the GPLv3 terms and conditions for this case would apply equally well here?