6 ms·
"Subject to the exceptions" conflicts with the "no exceptions" wording in the GPL licenses, so I don't even see how any of this constitutes a valid license
by moeffju 8mo ago
"Subject to the exceptions" conflicts with the "no exceptions" wording in the GPL licenses, so I don't even see how any of this constitutes a valid license
- gowld 8mo agoAGPL does not say "no exceptions". AGPL explicity allows exceptions: https://github.com/mattermost/mattermost/blob/master/LICENSE.txt https://github.com/mattermost/mattermost/blob/master/LICENSE... https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.en.html https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.en.html
- gpm 8mo agoI read the exceptions as a grant of additional rights to mattermost's copyright (but not to third parties), I don't think that conflicts. I'm not sure that they actually granted a GPL license at all though. I could see this document being read as an advertisement that one might be for sale instead of a grant... (Not a lawyer)