If you read the article, it implies that people like Heroku and others offering hosted Redis is EXACTLY the kind of thing they are trying to prevent with this clause.
The thing is, the AGPL already existed for dealing with the whole "cloud vendors turning things effectively proprietary" issue.
But the issue doesn't seem to be "cloud vendors turn things effectively proprietary", but rather "cloud vendors offer the same services we want to offer, so we don't get the income that's paying for our development work". A cloud vendor can just run AGPL software and offer it as a service if they share their modifications (if any). They can't do this with software under this new license.
True, but in practice, may companies seem reluctant to offer commercial services with AGPL software. And at least with the AGPL, they are required to give back their changes, which helps the project. Granted, not all firms will be making changes, but still, I think the AGPL is better than this "Common Clause" thing, which is basically pretending to be something its not.
The thing is, the AGPL already existed for dealing with the whole "cloud vendors turning things effectively proprietary" issue.