If they did update their production code since their last source code release, then you're right, it would be a license violation. I don't know if this is the case. Either way, it is much better to make occasional source code releases than to not release any code at all, when the code is under a copyleft license.
If Truth Social is running Mastodon-based code on a server, even if it is a private beta, the source code needs to be made available under AGPLv3 to anyone who can access the service.
> d) Convey the object code by offering access from a designated place (gratis or for a charge), and offer equivalent access to the Corresponding Source in the same way through the same place at no further charge. You need not require recipients to copy the Corresponding Source along with the object code. If the place to copy the object code is a network server, the Corresponding Source may be on a different server (operated by you or a third party) that supports equivalent copying facilities, provided you maintain clear directions next to the object code saying where to find the Corresponding Source. Regardless of what server hosts the Corresponding Source, you remain obligated to ensure that it is available for as long as needed to satisfy these requirements.
