justinmclean
commented
6 years ago I note the LICENSE file also states this which seem at odds to the headers.
All code in any directories or sub-directories that end with .html or .css is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License, which full text can be found here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode.
Some of the css files in the templates seem to be licensed under Apache 2 while others seem to be bound by CC SA 4 as specified in the main license file being that there are no headers in the files.
The ones which have Apache headers are: https://github.com/google/material-design-lite/blob/mdl-1.x/templates/android-dot-com/styles.css https://github.com/google/material-design-lite/blob/mdl-1.x/templates/article/styles.css https://github.com/google/material-design-lite/blob/mdl-1.x/templates/dashboard/styles.css https://github.com/google/material-design-lite/blob/mdl-1.x/templates/text-only/styles.css
The ones without headers are: https://github.com/google/material-design-lite/blob/mdl-1.x/templates/blog/styles.css https://github.com/google/material-design-lite/blob/mdl-1.x/templates/portfolio/styles.css
If they were all licensed under Apache 2, that would make it much easier to use the CSS in Apache projects. Were the two files without Apache headers an oversight, or was that a conscious decision?
If it was an oversight, I'd be happy to create a pull request.