This is a huge difference. The GPL and its flavor are explicitly not about use. They place zero restrictions on use. Unlike, say, just about all proprietary software.
It only governs distribution and especially prevents distributors from locking their users in, and from placing restrictions on their users' use of the software.
Depends on your definition of "user"/"use" and "distribution" really.
If the service provider is the "user," and performing actions with it on behalf of the ultimate user is "use," and not "distribution," then you are technically correct. It restricts the service provider from forcing their customers to be dependent on the them and/or restricting the end users' use of the service, like the GPL does for proprietary software the user runs on their machine.
I personally disagree that running something on behalf of a user makes you the end user, but there's always the GPL if you think that.
