Readers looking to understand open source software licenses will agree that the landscape can be complex for beginners.
This comprehensive overview unravels the key types of open source licenses, clearly outlining how they work, their differences, as well as guidance on choosing and complying with licenses.
You'll gain an introductory foundation on open source philosophy, see profiles of common permissive and copyleft licenses, and learn critical factors in selecting the right license for your open source project's objectives.
Introduction to Open Source Software Licenses
Open source software is developed collaboratively by communities of developers who contribute code and documentation to create free and openly available software. Unlike proprietary software that places restrictions on usage and distribution, open source software guarantees end users the freedom to use, modify, and share the software.
However, this freedom needs to be protected legally for open source projects to thrive. That's where open source licenses come in - they allow software to remain open while providing legal protections against misuse.
There are several types of open source licenses, each with their own unique terms, that aim to uphold the core principles of open source software:
Understanding Open Source Software and Its Philosophy
Open source software is software with source code that anyone can inspect, modify, and enhance. The open source philosophy values open collaboration, community-driven development, rapid prototyping, transparency, and early bug detection.
Key aspects of open source software include:
- Free redistribution - anyone can use, modify and distribute the software
- Accessible source code - the code is public and easily viewed
- Continuous improvements - enabled by community collaboration
Open source licenses aim to protect these ideals.
The Role of Licenses in Open Source Projects
Open source licenses set the terms under which the software can be used, modified and redistributed. This serves multiple purposes:
- Allows commercial use of open source software
- Protects open source code from proprietary forks
- Requires user improvements to be open sourced
- Credits the original creators
- Allows monetization through dual licensing
Without open source licenses, commercial usage and redistribution could violate copyright. Licenses bridge this gap.
Preview of the Types of Open Source Licenses
There are two main categories of open source licenses:
Permissive - minimal restrictions on usage and distribution
Copyleft - requires user improvements to the code be open sourced
Common permissive licenses include MIT, Apache 2.0 and BSD. The GPL license is the most popular copyleft license.
Later sections explore these licenses and their subtleties in more depth.
How does open-source software licensing work?
Open source licenses allow the free use, modification, and distribution of software. For a license to be approved as open source by the Open Source Initiative (OSI), it must comply with the Open Source Definition and complete the OSI's license review process.
Here are some key things to know about open-source licensing:
- Permissions: Open source licenses grant permissions to use, modify, and share the software freely. Some licenses have conditions like requiring modified versions to remain open source.
- Copyright: The software code is still protected by copyright law. The copyright holder, often the original authors, provides permissions through the license.
- License compatibility: Some open source licenses are compatible for combining code but others have restrictions. For example, GPL-licensed code cannot be integrated with proprietary closed-source code.
- Types of licenses: Common open source licenses like MIT, BSD, Apache, and GPL have important differences in distributing derivative works, using patents, and commercialization. Picking the right license is important.
So in summary, open source licensing enables free software sharing and collaboration through copyright licenses. Understanding the permissions, compatibility, and conditions are key for both using and contributing to open source projects.
What are the four major types of open source licenses?
Open source licenses broadly fall under two categories - permissive and copyleft. Let's explore the four most popular OSS licenses:
Permissive Licenses
These licenses allow users to modify and reuse open source code without requiring derivative works to be open sourced.
Some examples include:
- MIT License: A short, permissive license that allows reuse of code in proprietary software without requiring source disclosure. Used by projects like React, Rails, NumPy.
- Apache License 2.0: Similar to MIT but with an express patent license grant. Used in Android, Apache, Swift.
Copyleft Licenses
These licenses require derivative works to be released under the same open source license. Source code availability is mandatory.
Examples include:
- GNU GPL: Requires source code availability for derivative works. Used in Linux, Git, WordPress. Has reciprocity requirements.
- GNU LGPL: A "lesser" GPL version for linking libraries. Source disclosure not needed for works using the library. Used in Mozilla, GIMP.
Choosing an open source license depends on the project objectives and community preferences. Permissive licenses encourage more usage while copyleft licenses ensure ongoing open source contributions.
What is the difference between open-source software and software Licence?
Open-source software and software licenses refer to two related but distinct concepts regarding how software code and products are distributed.
Open-source software is software for which the source code is made freely available for anyone to access, modify, and redistribute. The code is openly shared to enable community collaboration. Open-source software licenses outline the terms and conditions for using, modifying, and distributing that open source code.
Some key differences:
- Open-source software focuses on the code itself being freely shared. This allows for community improvements, customizations, etc.
- A software license refers to the legal permissions governing how the software can be used and distributed. Proprietary software also has licenses even if the code is not shared.
So while open-source software always comes with an open-source license, proprietary software that is freely downloadable can still have restrictive licenses limiting modification and redistribution.
The terms "free software" and "open-source software" are sometimes used interchangeably, but free software specifically means users have the freedoms to use, share, modify, and redistribute the software freely. So free and open-source software provides flexibility that proprietary software licenses may not permit even if the software is free of cost.
Understanding these distinctions allows developers and users to determine which software aligns with their goals for sharing, collaboration, and customization freedom.
What are the 5 different types of software licenses?
There are 5 main categories of software licenses:
- Public Domain License - This is the most permissive license where copyright is waived entirely. Software under public domain can be used, modified, and distributed without any restrictions.
- Permissive License - These licenses allow software to be used, modified, and distributed freely. However, they require modified versions to retain original copyright/license when redistributed. Examples are MIT, Apache 2.0, BSD.
- Copyleft License - Also known as "share-alike" license. It requires modified versions to use the same copyleft license terms as the original work. This helps software remain free and open source. Popular copyleft licenses are GPL, LGPL.
- Proprietary License - This restricts users from accessing, modifying or redistributing the software. Proprietary software is owned by an individual or company with exclusive copyright. Users must agree to certain terms of use.
- Custom License - Some software uses custom or project-specific licenses with customized terms for usage, modification and redistribution. These are tailored to the specific needs of the project.
Choosing an appropriate open source license involves understanding tradeoffs around commercial use, derivative works, patent protection, compatibility with other licenses, etc. Permissive and copyleft licenses are most popular for open source distribution.
Exploring the Types of Open Source Licenses
Open source licenses allow the free distribution and modification of software source code. There are two main categories of open source licenses: permissive and copyleft.
Permissive vs. Copyleft: The Core Differences
Permissive licenses allow users to modify and redistribute software without requiring them to release source code. The MIT, Apache 2.0, and BSD licenses are common permissive licenses.
Copyleft licenses require modified versions to retain the same licensing terms on redistribution. This helps enforce open source principles. Popular copyleft licenses include GPLv3 and AGPLv3.
Key differences:
- Permissive licenses have fewer restrictions, while copyleft licenses mandate sharing of modifications.
- Permissive licensing is better for commercial products, while copyleft protects open source ideals.
- Mixing permissive and copyleft code can be complex due to conflicting requirements.
Understanding the 5 Types of Software Licenses in Open Source
There are 5 common types of open source software licenses:
- Permissive: MIT, Apache 2.0 - allow reuse with no copyleft restrictions
- Copyleft: GPL, AGPL - require sharing of modified source code
- LGPL: Allows linking with proprietary code
- Creative Commons: For creative works like images, videos
- Custom: Unique terms crafted by projects
Each serves different needs depending on software purpose and community values.
The Best Open Source License for Commercial Use
Permissive licenses like MIT and Apache 2.0 are best for commercial open source projects. They allow proprietary modifications without requiring public source code availability. This facilitates business models around open source software.
The LGPL license also works for commercial use. It permits linking to proprietary code while maintaining open source core libraries.
Open Source Software Examples and Their Licenses
- Linux Kernel - GPLv2: Requires sharing of modifications
- ReactJS - MIT: Permissive license with no copyleft restrictions
- MySQL - GPLv2: Copyleft license ensuring continued open source access
- Blender 3D - GPL: Requires derivative works be distributed under GPL
Matching project values with appropriate license terms is key in open source development.
sbb-itb-9c854a5
Permissive Open Source Licenses
Permissive open source licenses place minimal restrictions on how software can be used, modified, and distributed. This gives developers broad freedoms when working with permissively licensed code.
Defining Permissive Open Source Licenses
Permissive open source licenses differ from copyleft licenses in that they do not require derivative works to adopt the same licensing terms. This means you can modify and integrate permissively licensed code into proprietary software without needing to open source that code. Common permissive licenses include MIT, Apache 2.0, BSD, and zlib licenses.
Some key aspects of permissive licensing:
- Allows use of code in proprietary software
- Does not require sharing source code of derivative works
- Compatible for combining with other open source licenses
- Gives up protections compared to copyleft licensing
So while permissive licensing provides flexibility, it also relinquishes some control over how others might use the code down the road.
Pros and Cons of Permissive Licensing
Pros
- Promotes widespread adoption and commercialization
- Compatible with many open source and proprietary licenses
- Allows proprietary modifications and additions
Cons
- Relinquishes control over derivative works
- Code could be used in unethical ways
- Discourages reciprocal contributions back to project
Ultimately whether permissive licensing makes sense depends on the goals and values of the open source project. The flexibility can promote contributions, but the lack of protections is a tradeoff to consider.
Common Permissive Licenses: MIT, Apache, and More
Some of the most popular permissive open source licenses include:
MIT License - Extremely simple and permissive. Allows reuse in proprietary software provided the license is included.
Apache 2.0 License - Permissive but includes express patent license from contributors. Maintained by Apache Foundation.
BSD 3-Clause License - Permissive license with attribution required. Used by projects like TensorFlow and OpenBSD.
zlib License - Permissive license focused on software libraries. Used in key infrastructural libraries.
While the details vary, these licenses generally allow broad freedoms for reusing and modifying code with few restrictions. This flexibility makes them a popular choice, especially for libraries and frameworks designed for integration.
Copyleft Licenses
Copyleft licenses require derivative works built from copyleft-licensed code to adopt the same open source license. This ensures the open source nature of projects is preserved as code is reused and modified.
The Essence of Copyleft in Open Source
Copyleft provisions require modified versions or derivative works of copyleft-licensed code to use the same license. This differs from permissive licenses, which allow derivative projects to adopt any license, including proprietary closed-source licenses.
Some key points about copyleft:
- It preserves open source licensing as code is reused. Without copyleft, modified works could become closed source.
- The goal is preventing open source code being made proprietary through modification and distribution.
- It encourages collaboration since all improvements must be released as open source.
Analyzing the Advantages and Disadvantages of Copyleft
There are some notable advantages of copyleft licensing:
- Encourages open source contributions as all improvements must be open source.
- Prevents open source projects being made closed source through modification.
- Promotes community collaboration around projects.
However, there are also some potential drawbacks:
- Can be incompatible with some business models involving proprietary add-ons or extensions.
- Poses legal risks if license obligations are not fully understood.
- Can limit integration with proprietary software which has licensing conflicts.
Overall, copyleft brings important benefits but may not suit all software business needs. The choice depends on the context and goals of a project.
Profiles of Common Copyleft Licenses
Some well-known copyleft licenses:
GNU GPL - The most popular FOSS license. Used by Linux, Bash, Vim, and more. Requires source code access and copyleft reuse.
GNU LGPL - A more permissive library variant of GPL. Allows linking to proprietary code. Used in Git, OpenSSL, Qt.
Affero GPL (AGPL) - An enhanced GPL variant that copylefts network service source code. Used by MongoDB, Odoo.
These provide a spectrum of copyleft conditions to choose from for open source projects. The differences center around code linking, network services, and license compatibility issues.
Choosing the Right Open Source License
Open source licenses are a critical but often overlooked aspect of any open source project. Selecting the right license involves balancing factors like compatibility, code modifications, and commercial use. This section offers guidance on picking an appropriate open source license to align with your project's objectives.
Factors to Consider When Selecting a License
When evaluating open source licenses, key aspects to weigh include:
- Compatibility: Some licenses like GPL have "viral" clauses requiring derivative works be GPL too. Others like MIT have minimal restrictions. Understand compatibility with other licenses if you want your code reused.
- Allowing Commercial Use: Permissive licenses let companies use the code freely, even in closed-source products. More restrictive licenses mandate giving back to the community.
- Code Modifications: Requirements around publishing changes vary significantly by license. Weigh needs to retain control vs encouraging contributions.
- Patent Usage: Whether patent rights are granted to users/contributors is a consideration for some projects. Explicit patent licensing provides legal protection.
Carefully examine these components when selecting among major licenses like GPL, LGPL, BSD, MIT, Apache, or custom variants.
Matching Licenses with Project Objectives
Smart license decisions align with your goals:
- Libraries benefit from permissive MIT, BSD, Apache licenses to maximize usage.
- End-user apps may prefer GPL to guarantee code stays open source long-term.
- Web services need licensing that allows modifying and integrating into proprietary systems.
- Standard protocols require licensing optimized for wide adoption from many vendors.
Discuss preferred outcomes with your community to pick appropriate open source software licenses.
The Process of Changing Open Source Licenses
Transitioning established projects to new licenses can be complex:
- Announce early, discuss rationale openly with users/contributors. Make the case persuasively to build consensus.
- Review ownership history of all contributions. Get re-licensing consent from key past contributors where possible.
- Set clear timelines for switchover. Support old license in legacy versions while moving new releases to updated license.
- Update all documentation, READMEs, contribution policies to reflect new licensing terms.
With careful planning and community dialogue, even major licensing changes can progress smoothly. Revisiting project licenses periodically ensures optimal alignment as goals evolve.
Complying with Open Source Licenses
Open source licenses outline specific conditions for using, modifying, and distributing open source software. Adhering to these terms is crucial for remaining legally compliant. This section provides practical guidance on meeting open source license obligations.
Adhering to Open Source License Conditions and Restrictions
When utilizing open source software in your projects, be sure to:
- Carefully study the license terms to understand permissions, conditions, and restrictions
- Comply with attribution requirements (covered next)
- Abide by "copyleft" provisions mandating source code availability (see below)
- Get legal counsel if unsure of license implications
Document your compliance efforts through:
- An inventory of open source dependencies
- A record of attributions
- Source code availability
This protects your legal standing and ability to continue using open source software.
Attribution Requirements in Open Source Licensing
Most open source licenses mandate proper attribution, which involves:
- Retaining existing copyright and license notices in source code
- Prominently crediting copyright holders and software authors
- Linking to license text
To satisfy these conditions:
- Never remove licensing details from source code comments
- Visibly credit open source projects/authors in documentation, websites, splash screens etc
- Hyperlink license text where appropriate
Proper attribution shows respect for open source authors and upholds license terms.
The Obligation to Release Source Code Under Copyleft Licenses
Copyleft licenses like the GPL include a provision requiring published works derived from that open source code to remain open source. This means:
- If your proprietary software utilizes a copyleft-licensed component, you must publish your source code under the same copyleft terms
- Failing to do so puts you in breach of the original component's licensing
Before using copyleft software, decide if you are willing/able to open source your full project. If not, avoid that dependency or seek legal advice. Releasing source code per copyleft terms ensures you comply with licensing requirements.
Addressing Common Questions and Misconceptions
Open source licenses can seem complicated at first glance. Here are answers to some frequent questions about open source licensing to help clarify key aspects.
Navigating the Complexities of Mixing Licenses
Combining software components under different open source licenses in the same project can raise legal complexities regarding compatibility. Here are some key factors to consider:
- Verify license compatibility - Some open source licenses have specific restrictions around combining with other licenses. Always check compatibility before reusing code.
- Understand license propagation - The terms of more restrictive licenses typically propagate to derivative works. This may limit how you can license your project's output.
- Isolate incompatible components - You may be able to isolate certain components under incompatible licenses into separate modules/processes to avoid legal issues.
- Seek legal counsel if unsure - There may be nuances around interpreting licenses. Seek professional legal advice if you are unsure of requirements.
Adhering to all licenses of reused components is crucial for legal compliance. Check compatibility upfront before combining open source software under different licenses.
The Legality of Reusing Open Source Code Under NDA
Much open source licensed software permits reuse in proprietary applications without needing to make your full source code open. However, you still must comply with the terms of licenses of reused open source components. This includes retaining copyright notices, providing source code if required, and adhering to other license obligations.
Note that requiring those receiving your software to sign an NDA does not supersede your responsibility to comply with reuse terms of open source licenses. You cannot use an NDA to restrict access to source code if required by component licenses. Ensure you understand reuse rights and requirements before reusing open source code.
Dispelling the Myth: Open Source vs. Public Domain
There is a common misconception that all open source software is in the public domain. However, most open source licenses have specific reuse terms and conditions defined in them. This means code under such licenses is not actually public domain.
For example, MIT license requires retaining copyright notice on reuse. So MIT licensed code - while open source - is not public domain since there are conditions around reuse. Only code explicitly released into the public domain places no restrictions on reuse.
So be sure to still adhere to license terms when reusing open source software. The open source nature does not automatically equate to public domain status. Check licenses to understand requirements.
Conclusion: Recap and Essential Points
Summary of Open Source License Categories
Open source licenses can be broadly divided into two categories:
- Permissive licenses - These allow users to modify and redistribute the software without requiring changes to be open sourced. Examples include MIT, Apache 2.0, BSD. They place minimal restrictions on usage.
- Copyleft licenses - These require modified versions to stay open source. Examples include GPL, LGPL, AGPL. They ensure ongoing open access but can limit commercial usage.
Choosing between them depends on the project's priorities and community values around sharing vs commercialization.
Critical Considerations When Choosing an Open Source License
When selecting an open source license, key aspects to evaluate include:
- Compatibility - Will the license allow integration with other open source or proprietary software?
- Commercial usage - Does the license permit selling the software or SaaS services based on it?
- Liability limitations - Does it limit legal risks for contributors and redistributors?
- Community norms - What license does the language/framework ecosystem commonly use?
Understanding these elements ensures the license aligns with the project's technical and business needs.
Final Thoughts on Adhering to Open Source License Terms
Using open source code requires carefully studying the associated license terms. Key best practices:
- Maintain licenses and copyright notices with code distributions
- Track licenses and compliance responsibility for dependencies
- Seek legal counsel if unsure of rights or usage scenarios
Following license conditions is crucial for avoiding disputes. They enable collaborative innovation.
