Add NOTICE File with License Information for Dual MIT/Apache-2.0 Compliance

[nnabeyang]

The bluesky-social/atproto repository is dual-licensed under MIT and Apache-2.0 licenses. Therefore, it is necessary to include copies of the licenses in the distributed artifacts. However, the repository currently lacks these copies. This PR addresses this issue by creating a NOTICE file and including the license information within it.

[K-Nksm]

Thank you for the contribution!

I have additional two questions:

• Could you provide me an example repository link which just includes NOTICE file to comply MIT license? MIT license seems to require including license term in the source code.
• Original source code is licensed under dual MIT/Apache-2.0 license. Should I comply to both of these, not one of them?

I would appreciate it if you could just provide a reference url!

---

In LICENSE.txt in Bluesky repository,

Downstream projects and end users may chose either license individually, or both together, at their discretion.

So we can just use MIT license, which basically requires the users that

The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all
copies or substantial portions of the Software.

¹

The permission notice can be just the URL to MIT license text².
The copied files are JSON so I added description keys to include both copyright notice and URL to MIT license text.

From what I googled, NOTICE file is used to comply to Apache-2.0 license³.

Footnotes

1. https://github.com/bluesky-social/atproto/blob/80dae835405a71a325953858d0966352161e8d80/LICENSE-MIT.txt#L10C1-L11C48 ↩

2. https://qiita.com/takobuta_dev/items/120e710ab99721e98f8d#mit%E3%83%A9%E3%82%A4%E3%82%BB%E3%83%B3%E3%82%B9%E3%81%AE%E5%85%A8%E6%96%87 ↩

3. https://yamory.io/blog/about-apache-license ↩

[nnabeyang]

@K-Nksm

I believe I misunderstood the handling of dual licensing. Since it is possible to choose either license, I think it is permissible to remove the Apache 2.0 license notation from the NOTICE file. I didn't fully understand because I had never created any deliverables that depended on dual licensing.

Below is a link to a part of the VScode NOTICE file, which serves as an example of dual licensing.
https://github.com/microsoft/vscode/blob/main/ThirdPartyNotices.txt#L2064-L2067

[K-Nksm]

From the repository you provided, it seems enough to just mention the author and license terms in a file (ThirdPartyNotices in their case, NOTICE in our case) to comply with MIT license.
Therefore this PR properly addresses the license issue.
Thank you very much!