3 ms·
> But I don't see any good argument that the FSF's interpretation of the corrupted AGPL should supersede that of the copyright holders. It seems like the copy
by wtallis 5y ago
> But I don't see any good argument that the FSF's interpretation of the corrupted AGPL should supersede that of the copyright holders.
It seems like the copyright holders assembled a chimera license that is in conflict with itself. The resulting ambiguity should be construed against the copyright holders and in favor of the users.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- djur 5y agoThe court's answer to that is that the language in the Neo4j license referring to "this License" should be interpreted as referring to the entirety of the license (i.e. AGPL combined with Commons Clause), which means there is no conflict.