Copyright isn't clear

[robredpath]

Brief Description

The copyright situation with the repo is unclear, and this in turn makes the enforceability of the license unclear.

The README says:

This material is copyright (c) 2010-2013 Open Knowledge Foundation.

It is open and licensed under the GNU Affero General Public License (AGPL) v3.0

Given that previous work has been carried out by a range of contributors, including Derilinx (under contract to DI, and now ODSC), members of the IATI community and DI staff, it's unclear how applicable this is; not to mention that the end date of the copyright assertion is a decade ago.

Severity
Low

Expected Results/Behaviour
A clear understanding of the copyright situation of the contents of the repo that underpins the validity of the license.

[siemvaessen]

I believe copyright and licensing are 2 different things. Copyright (Intellectual Property) belongs to an author. That author decided under which license a copyrighted piece of work can be used. OKF still is and probably will be the copyright holder but use of this work can be used as described within the AGPL license.

Correct me if I'm wrong though :-)