On 16/09/15 22:34, Kevin Fleming wrote:
The statement 'dual licensed' is illogical here, as only only license is named (AGPLv3)
In fact, the upstream has made such a mess of the license file, that the OP really needs to contact them directly, to clarify the licence terms and make sure that they had actually understood the licensing on any third party code they used.
If they had actually complied with the licence, the LICENSE file would have contained the actual legal text of the Affero licence.
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
