Hi team 👋

I commend you for the decision to release your work under the permissive Apache License Version 2.0, but there are a lot of contradictory clauses in the README which seem to limit that freedom. These additions aren't reflected in the LICENSE file, and they seem to go against the open-source nature of the project as well as your choice of license, and can create confusion around what is allowed and what isn't.

I am not a lawyer, but my understanding is that the LICENSE file trumps the README, i.e. these additions have no effect. It's also worth noting that you specifically mention in the README that "Dynmap is open source, subject to the Apache Public License, v2" - this IMO is a clear statement that the additional restrictions in the README are not part of the license agreement.

Could you please clarify these discrepancies? If they are genuine project policies, the LICENSE file should accurately represent them (whether that's through writing your own software license or choosing a less-permissive license to suit your needs).

The additions I am specifically concerned with are:

• "If the Dynmap team comes to support this platform or version, the modifying team must agree to cease distribution of the unofficial version, unless otherwise authorized to continue doing so."
  • This conflicts with APL v2's Section 4 ("Redistribution"), which allows "reproduction and distribution of the Work or Derivative Works thereof in any medium, with or without modifications."
• "Building a custom version of Dynmap for use on a personal or on a specific server, so long as this version is NOT distributed to other parties."
  • This is in violation of Section 4 of APL v2, which permits free redistribution of the Work or Derivative Works.
• "Any modified version CANNOT be monetized or otherwise charged for, under any circumstances, nor can redistribution of it be limited or restricted."
  • APL v2 does not impose such restrictions. Section 4 allows you to "reproduce and distribute copies of the Work or Derivative Works."
• "The modified code must continue to be Apache Public License v2, with no additional conditions or restrictions, including full public availability of the modified source code."
  • APL v2's Section 4 doesn't require "full public availability" of modified source code, only that you meet the terms if you choose to distribute.
  • Moreover, Section 4 explicitly allows for additional or different license terms for your modifications.
• "The support messages in DynmapCore MUST be modified to refer to the supporting team (or, at least, removed). The modified version should NOT refer to the Dynmap Discord nor to /r/Dynmap on Reddit for support."
  • These seem to add additional conditions not in APL v2, conflicting with its permissive nature that allows modifications "with or without" further conditions, as per Section 4.

If your intention is to restrict so many of the freedoms usually allowed under the Apache License, you might consider switching to a less permissive license that aligns more closely with your project policies. The GNU General Public License (GPL) or the Mozilla Public License (MPL) might be more appropriate choices in that case.