But FSF have closed the software as a service hole

"The Free Software Foundation avoided closing the SaaS hole – a problem caused by an archaic notion of distribution as being tied to a diskette or CD – with GPL v3."

This hole has been closed with the Affero General Public License (AGPL):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affero_General_Public_License

The development of this license has involved the FSF from the start, and the drafting of GPL v3 led by the FSF has specifically catered for the requirement to enable GPL and AGPL code to be combined.

It is clearly up to copyright holders to choose which license to apply to original work, but for those providing web-services who see provision of software as a service in the same light as software distribution and want a copyleft license compatible with the GPL, the AGPL is likely to be a suitable choice.

In practice the FSF need to maintain and make available both licenses, as most of the software released under either do not have copyright assigned to the FSF, and not everyone who owns the copyright in GPL licensed software will both want to and be contractually able to release this under the AGPL. So when writing articles concerning copyleft issues affecting software as a service, please in future mention the AGPL and please don't suggest that the FSF do not support this.