docs: Ambigue wording

[carlosmintfan]

On which page do you see this issue?

https://flyonui.com/docs/getting-started/license/

Describe the issue

Hi,
the link mentioned above states FlyonUI is [...] distributed under dual license terms: the “MIT” license and the “THIRD PARTY LICENSES.”
However, AFAIK, dual licensing means that I can choose which license I'd like to follow. In this case, though, I have to follow all the licenses unless I remove the third-party components of which I don't want to follow the license. So perhaps you could remove that “dual license terms” wording and just say “this is the license of FlyonUI itself” and “these are the licenses of integrated third-party libs”.

What browsers are you seeing the problem on?

All browsers

[github-actions]

Hi @carlosmintfan

Thank you for your support in helping us improve FlyonUI!

We’ve received your submission and will respond within few business days. Our team handles issues one at a time, and we’ll be reviewing yours as soon as possible.

In the meantime, any additional details or a reproducible example would be greatly appreciated and will help us resolve the issue more efficiently.

Thank you for your patience and understanding!

[yagnikvamja]

Hello @carlosmintfan ,

Just to clarify, the Third Party Licenses section does not refer to "Third Party Plugins." Instead, it specifically pertains to Daisy and Preline, which form the core foundation of FlyonUI. Since both are integral to the framework, their licenses rightfully remain under the Third Party Licenses and cannot be removed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or need further clarification.

~Best regards,

[carlosmintfan]

HI @yagnikvamja, okay, I understand, but still AFAIK “dual licensing” is not the right word here (I could be mistaken though). Rather you have to follow all these licenses together, so FlyonUI “integrates code which is licensed under this and that license”, not “is dual licensed under this and that license”.

[carlosmintfan]

But being distributed under dual license terms sounds also a bit different from being dual licensed. Not a big thing...just thought this wording is not that appropiate, but it doesn't really matter. Just somebody could perhaps understand he/she can choose between either the FlyonUI license or the third-party licenses...perhaps.

[PruthviPraj00]

Hii @carlosmintfan,

The primary reason for using the third-party plugin is to ensure compliance with the Preline UI Fair Use License. By incorporating it, we can prevent any third party from violating the Preline Fair Use License while using FlyonUI.

[carlosmintfan]

I understand that. My whole point is that "dual license terms" could be interpreted as "comply either with the FlyonUI OR the third-party licenses; no need to comply with both at the same time" because that’s what "dual licensing" means AFAIK. I don‘t really like the Preline licensing either and the half-MIT…well, Preline is not GPL-compatible (IANAL, but that’s my interpretation) but all this MIT sounds like "great, I can do whatever I want provided I copy-paste that attribution". Well, but I don’t like the GPL so great if stuff like this is incompatible with it like PHP, LOL 🚀🚀🚀

[carlosmintfan]

I‘d like to mention another problem: The link I mentioned above states in bold: Preline (MIT License)
Then a few lines below it states: License: MIT License & Preline UI Fair Use License
If a user just reads the bold text and later sees "oh no, I‘m making a product competing with Preline" etc. - well, that’s not great, so please update the bold text to "Preline (Preline UI Fair Use License)". Even if they say it, Preline is NOT dual-licensed MIT & Preline UI Fair Use License; that just doesn’t really make sense because then everyone could opt for the MIT license. The MIT license must rather be deemed part of the Preline UI Fair Use License.

Feel free to tell me if you don’t understand or don’t agree with my interpretation, but for me that makes simply more sense.

[ajaypatelaj]

Dear @carlosmintfan,

Thank you for your thoughtful feedback. I understand your concern regarding the use of dual-license terms and the potential confusion for users. Based on your suggestion, we will be removing the phrase “dual license terms” from the text related to FlyonUI to avoid any ambiguity. FlyonUI will be clearly stated as being available under the MIT license and THIRD PARTY LICENSES for both personal and commercial use.

However, with regards to Preline, I want to clarify that the Preline project itself uses the dual-license term explicitly in their own license file. Since we don’t have control over how they present their licensing, we’re unable to make changes to that on their behalf. We hope this helps clarify the situation, but please don’t hesitate to reach out if you have any further questions or suggestions.

Thank you again for bringing this up!