We have a clarifying question because there seems to be some confusion about what language should be used for the proceeding deployments of Uniswap V3.
The Voltz Additional Use Grants is:
Voltz Labs Technology Limited (“Voltz”) is granted an additional use grant to allow the Voltz DAO to use the Uniswap V3 Core software code (which is made available to Voltz subject to license available at https://github.com/Uniswap/v3-core/blob/main/LICENSE (the “Uniswap Code”)). As part of this additional use grant, the Voltz DAO receives a limited worldwide license to use the Uniswap Code for the purposes of: creating, deploying and making available aspects of an interest rate swap automated market maker (the “IRS AMM”); to modify and update the IRS AMM over time; and deploy the IRS AMM and portions thereof as smart contracts on blockchain-based applications and protocols. The Voltz DAO is permitted to use subcontractors to do this work. This license is conditional on Voltz and the Voltz DAO complying with the terms of the Business Source License 1.1, made available at https://github.com/Uniswap/v3-core/blob/main/LICENSE.
Our understanding was that Voltz needed the additional use grant because it sought to use the innovations of Uniswap in its derivative product.
This forum thread appears to be for chains seeking a Uniswap v3 deployment where the deployment is owned and controlled by the Unsiwap DAO. In these instances where control is maintained by the DAO and the deployment is done to the DAO’s expectation, the chain requesting the deployment can receive an exemption from the license.
While the additional use grant could apply to chains seeking a Uniswap v3 deployment, it would give them additional breadth that the DAO doesn’t need to give. If our understanding is correct, the proceeding deployments such as Celo, Moonbeam, and Gnosis should be requesting an exemption from the license using the sample language in the first forum post.