chore(wallet): Update LICENSE by FrederikBolding · Pull Request #10074 · MetaMask/core · GitHub
Skip to content

chore(wallet): Update LICENSE - #10074

Open
FrederikBolding wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
fb/wallet-lib-license
Open

chore(wallet): Update LICENSE#10074
FrederikBolding wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
fb/wallet-lib-license

Conversation

@FrederikBolding

@FrederikBolding FrederikBolding commented Sep 2, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Explanation

Update LICENSE of wallet to match clients.

References

https://consensyssoftware.atlassian.net/browse/WPC-1255


Note

Medium Risk
License change materially restricts commercial use and redistribution compared to MIT/Apache; downstream consumers and legal review should treat this as a breaking compliance change even though code is unchanged.

Overview
Replaces the dual MIT/Apache-2.0 licensing for @metamask/wallet with the ConsenSys Non-Commercial Use license used elsewhere in the monorepo (e.g. client-aligned packages).

The root packages/wallet/LICENSE is rewritten to ConsenSys copyright and NC terms (attribution notice, MAU cap, commercial contact). LICENSE.MIT and LICENSE.APACHE2 are removed, and package.json license changes from (MIT OR Apache-2.0) to SEE LICENSE IN LICENSE.

No runtime or API code changes—only legal/metadata for npm and downstream compliance.

Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 6e04222. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.

Comment thread packages/wallet/LICENSE

@cryptodev-2s cryptodev-2s Sep 2, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nit: similar to the previously merged cryptography package should this be instead

Suggested change
Copyright ConsenSys Software Inc. 2026. All rights reserved.
Copyright 2026 ConsenSys Software Inc. All rights reserved.

Comment thread packages/wallet/LICENSE

@cryptodev-2s cryptodev-2s Sep 2, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

A side question we are referring here to repository instead of package, does this means this is applied to all core packages ? Should we use “this package” ?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants