Is `github.com/mattermost/mattermost-server` safe for commercial use?

Go module package · License: AGPL-3.0 AND AGPL-3.0-only AND Apache-2.0 AND BSD-2-Clause AND BSD-3-Clause AND CC-BY-3.0 AND CC-BY-4.0 AND FTL AND MIT AND MPL-2.0 AND NOASSERTION

github.com/mattermost/mattermost-server is licensed under AGPL-3.0 AND AGPL-3.0-only AND Apache-2.0 AND BSD-2-Clause AND BSD-3-Clause AND CC-BY-3.0 AND CC-BY-4.0 AND FTL AND MIT AND MPL-2.0 AND NOASSERTION. It carries no source-disclosure obligation, but its terms restrict how the software may be used, so all 5 shipping models below need a reading of the license itself.

Can I use github.com/mattermost/mattermost-server in SaaS, a distributed app, or internally?

How you ship it	Result	Why
Hosted SaaS	Needs review	The license string "AGPL-3.0 AND AGPL-3.0-only AND Apache-2.0 AND BSD-2-Clause AND BSD-3-Clause AND CC-BY-3.0 AND CC-BY-4.0 AND FTL AND MIT AND MPL-2.0 AND NOASSERTION" could not be parsed as an SPDX expression. The original license text needs individual review.
Distributed binary / app	Needs review	The license string "AGPL-3.0 AND AGPL-3.0-only AND Apache-2.0 AND BSD-2-Clause AND BSD-3-Clause AND CC-BY-3.0 AND CC-BY-4.0 AND FTL AND MIT AND MPL-2.0 AND NOASSERTION" could not be parsed as an SPDX expression. The original license text needs individual review.
Delivered to customer	Needs review	The license string "AGPL-3.0 AND AGPL-3.0-only AND Apache-2.0 AND BSD-2-Clause AND BSD-3-Clause AND CC-BY-3.0 AND CC-BY-4.0 AND FTL AND MIT AND MPL-2.0 AND NOASSERTION" could not be parsed as an SPDX expression. The original license text needs individual review.
Internal use only	Needs review	The license string "AGPL-3.0 AND AGPL-3.0-only AND Apache-2.0 AND BSD-2-Clause AND BSD-3-Clause AND CC-BY-3.0 AND CC-BY-4.0 AND FTL AND MIT AND MPL-2.0 AND NOASSERTION" could not be parsed as an SPDX expression. The original license text needs individual review.
Published library	Needs review	The license string "AGPL-3.0 AND AGPL-3.0-only AND Apache-2.0 AND BSD-2-Clause AND BSD-3-Clause AND CC-BY-3.0 AND CC-BY-4.0 AND FTL AND MIT AND MPL-2.0 AND NOASSERTION" could not be parsed as an SPDX expression. The original license text needs individual review.

What obligations does github.com/mattermost/mattermost-server carry?

None

If you only use it at build time, the answer changes.

The license string "AGPL-3.0 AND AGPL-3.0-only AND Apache-2.0 AND BSD-2-Clause AND BSD-3-Clause AND CC-BY-3.0 AND CC-BY-4.0 AND FTL AND MIT AND MPL-2.0 AND NOASSERTION" could not be parsed as an SPDX expression. The original license text needs individual review.

Questions this page answers

Is github.com/mattermost/mattermost-server safe for commercial use?

github.com/mattermost/mattermost-server is licensed under AGPL-3.0 AND AGPL-3.0-only AND Apache-2.0 AND BSD-2-Clause AND BSD-3-Clause AND CC-BY-3.0 AND CC-BY-4.0 AND FTL AND MIT AND MPL-2.0 AND NOASSERTION. It carries no source-disclosure obligation, but its terms restrict how the software may be used, so all 5 shipping models below need a reading of the license itself.

Can I use github.com/mattermost/mattermost-server (AGPL-3.0 AND AGPL-3.0-only AND Apache-2.0 AND BSD-2-Clause AND BSD-3-Clause AND CC-BY-3.0 AND CC-BY-4.0 AND FTL AND MIT AND MPL-2.0 AND NOASSERTION) in hosted saas?

The license string "AGPL-3.0 AND AGPL-3.0-only AND Apache-2.0 AND BSD-2-Clause AND BSD-3-Clause AND CC-BY-3.0 AND CC-BY-4.0 AND FTL AND MIT AND MPL-2.0 AND NOASSERTION" could not be parsed as an SPDX expression. The original license text needs individual review.

Can I use github.com/mattermost/mattermost-server (AGPL-3.0 AND AGPL-3.0-only AND Apache-2.0 AND BSD-2-Clause AND BSD-3-Clause AND CC-BY-3.0 AND CC-BY-4.0 AND FTL AND MIT AND MPL-2.0 AND NOASSERTION) in distributed binary / app?

The license string "AGPL-3.0 AND AGPL-3.0-only AND Apache-2.0 AND BSD-2-Clause AND BSD-3-Clause AND CC-BY-3.0 AND CC-BY-4.0 AND FTL AND MIT AND MPL-2.0 AND NOASSERTION" could not be parsed as an SPDX expression. The original license text needs individual review.

Can I use github.com/mattermost/mattermost-server (AGPL-3.0 AND AGPL-3.0-only AND Apache-2.0 AND BSD-2-Clause AND BSD-3-Clause AND CC-BY-3.0 AND CC-BY-4.0 AND FTL AND MIT AND MPL-2.0 AND NOASSERTION) in delivered to customer?

The license string "AGPL-3.0 AND AGPL-3.0-only AND Apache-2.0 AND BSD-2-Clause AND BSD-3-Clause AND CC-BY-3.0 AND CC-BY-4.0 AND FTL AND MIT AND MPL-2.0 AND NOASSERTION" could not be parsed as an SPDX expression. The original license text needs individual review.

Can I use github.com/mattermost/mattermost-server (AGPL-3.0 AND AGPL-3.0-only AND Apache-2.0 AND BSD-2-Clause AND BSD-3-Clause AND CC-BY-3.0 AND CC-BY-4.0 AND FTL AND MIT AND MPL-2.0 AND NOASSERTION) in internal use only?

The license string "AGPL-3.0 AND AGPL-3.0-only AND Apache-2.0 AND BSD-2-Clause AND BSD-3-Clause AND CC-BY-3.0 AND CC-BY-4.0 AND FTL AND MIT AND MPL-2.0 AND NOASSERTION" could not be parsed as an SPDX expression. The original license text needs individual review.

Can I use github.com/mattermost/mattermost-server (AGPL-3.0 AND AGPL-3.0-only AND Apache-2.0 AND BSD-2-Clause AND BSD-3-Clause AND CC-BY-3.0 AND CC-BY-4.0 AND FTL AND MIT AND MPL-2.0 AND NOASSERTION) in published library?

The license string "AGPL-3.0 AND AGPL-3.0-only AND Apache-2.0 AND BSD-2-Clause AND BSD-3-Clause AND CC-BY-3.0 AND CC-BY-4.0 AND FTL AND MIT AND MPL-2.0 AND NOASSERTION" could not be parsed as an SPDX expression. The original license text needs individual review.

Does github.com/mattermost/mattermost-server matter if it is only a build-time or dev dependency?

The license string "AGPL-3.0 AND AGPL-3.0-only AND Apache-2.0 AND BSD-2-Clause AND BSD-3-Clause AND CC-BY-3.0 AND CC-BY-4.0 AND FTL AND MIT AND MPL-2.0 AND NOASSERTION" could not be parsed as an SPDX expression. The original license text needs individual review.

This page covers one package. Your go.sum has many more.

Check your whole manifest →

How was this determined?

The license was read from the repository's own LICENSE file, falling back to deps.dev and then ClearlyDefined — Go has no central license metadata, so a project's LICENSE at its default branch is the most direct answer to what it is licensed under today, then evaluated against each shipping model. Dependencies in this ecosystem are linked statically, which is assumed here. Only the declared license is considered; code copied into a project's own source files is not detected by this method.

License data last reviewed 2026-08-24.

LicenseGuard reports information derived from published license texts and dependency manifests. It is not legal advice and using it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Results reflect license metadata as declared; they do not identify every obligation or violation. Consult qualified counsel for decisions that matter.

Listed in the official MCP registry, on Glama and on Smithery. Source on GitHub (Apache-2.0).