Licence has self conflicting wording, possible typo about fyne HOT 3 OPEN

I did confirm on Wikipedia that this "all rights reserved" usually is used to indicate that the authors do not want their work to be copied or used or modified unless a permission is obtained.

That isn't what the wikipedia article says to me at all. That phrase is included as part of the copyright and not a license term. In many geographies it is included and omission of it will not change the impact of copyright. Here in the UK copyright is automatically applied to any work created unless explicitly waived.

Open source is not about waiving copyright ownership, but about collaborating under suitable licensing terms so that everyone can use and contribute to the project.

from fyne.

The following article may be helpful - I appreciate it's not an identical license https://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/2121/mit-license-and-all-rights-reserved

from fyne.

The format we used is in some templates - such as this one: https://gist.github.com/nicolasdao/a7adda51f2f185e8d2700e1573d8a633#tldr---the-bsd-3-clause-license-should-do

As well as others. Due to it relating to the copyright and not the license I don't think this is an issue.

from fyne.