Thus, developers can'trely on this license to provide a strong copyleft. It also,indirectly, allows relicensing to GPL version 3, because there is away to relicense to the CeCILL v2, and the CeCILL v2 gives a way torelicense to any version of the GNU GPL. By itself, it has a copyleftcomparable to the GPL's, and incompatible with it. (If it madecompliance an actual condition of the license, it would not be a freesoftware license.) Unfortunately, its weak copyleftand choice of law clause make it incompatible with the GNU GPL.
Recent versions contain contract clausessimilar to the Open Software License, and should beavoided for the same reasons. This is a free software license, and compatible with the GPL. However, if you are looking for the best among lax, weak licenses, werecommend using the Apache 2.0 license among those. Contrary to its name, it is notbased on any of the BSD licenses, but on the ISC License,with the only difference being that it doesn't contain clauses that requirepreservation of copyright notices and the license notice.
It is also ambiguous, since the same people also callthe X11 license “the MIT License,”failing to distinguish them. It is based on the Apache License2.0; the scope of the patent license has changed so that whenan organization's employee works on a project, the organizationdoes not have to license all of its patents to recipients. It consists of the GPL, plus an exception allowing linking tosoftware not under the GPL.
- It requires notification of the original developer forpublication of a modified version.
- As far as we know, an implementation ofa design is always copyrightable.
- For further information, see our listof frequently asked questions aboutour licenses.
- This is a free software license, compatible with the GNU GPL.
- It also requires you to publish thesource of the program if you allow others to use it.
We try to list the most commonly encountered free software license onthis page, but cannot list them all; we'll try our best to answerquestions about free software licenses whether or not they are listedhere. GNU also has additional compatibility and commentary about the use of other licenses with the GNU-GPL family of licenses. GNU.org has a compatibility chart and additional commentary for the different versions of GPL.
Software Licenses
Even better, for a substantial program,use the Apache 2.0 license since it takes action against patent treachery. We urge you not to use the original BSD license for software youwrite. Theflaw is not fatal; that is, it does not render the software nonfree.But it does cause practical problems,including incompatibility with the GNU GPL. This license has been succeeded by the GNU AfferoGeneral Public License version 3; please use that instead. The new section, 2(d), covers the distribution of applicationprograms through web services or computer networks. The lack of requirement to preserve copyright notices and the license noticedoes not necessarily mean it is safe to remove them.
- Accordingly, there isalso no placeholder for copyright notice in the template of this licensecirculating in the internet.
- Adding that code to the EUPL-covered program providesgrounds to relicense it to the CeCILL v2.
- Some of the files containalternative license terms which are nonfree, or no licensinginformation at all, so including a copy of the License Agreementwill help avoid confusion when others want to distribute yoursoftware.
- The document with which they do so is calleda free software license.
- The NASA Open Source Agreement, version 1.3, is not a free softwarelicense because it includes a provision requiring changes to be your“original creation”.
- This is a free software license, compatible with the GPL via anexplicit dual-licensing clause.
Using Creative Commons and Open Software Licenses
We urge you not to use the ZPL version 1 for software you write.However, there is no reason to avoid running programs that have beenreleased under this license, such as previous versions of Zope. Of course, we urge you to avoid using nonfree software licenses, andto avoid using nonfree programs. This is a copyleft free software license, incompatible with the GPL.It is incompatible because it places extra restrictions onredistribution of modified versions that contradict the redistributionrequirements in the GPL.
The copyright disclaimer
It is incompatible with the GNU GPL because it does notcontain the explicit GPL-compatibility clause ofthe basic CeCILL. It is incompatible with theGPL because it has requirements that are not present in the GPL. This license is also sometimes called the“4-clause BSD license”. This creates practical problems likethose of the original BSD license, including incompatibility with the GNUGPL. It has a fewrequirements that render it incompatible with the GNU GPL, such as strongprohibitions on the use of Apache-related names. It consists of the GNU GPLversion 2, with one additional section that Affero added with FSFapproval.
GNU GPLv3 compatibility
It hassome attribution requirements which make it incompatible withGPLv2. Our comments about the Modified BSD licenseapply to this license too. This is the original BSD license with the advertising clause andanother clause removed. Our comments about the Zero-clause BSD license applyto this license. As the license is clearly based on the Expat License, we recommend tocall it the No-attribution Expat License (but please note that Expat has neverused this license). The difference between the X11 license and the Expat license isthat the X11 license contains an betory casino bonus extra paragraph about using the XConsortium's name.
This makes it possible to use the Unicode v3license as a template to release other data or software underit. It differs from earlier versions as it does not include specificreferences to Unicode. Are covered by the Unicode Terms of Use, a different, nonfreelicense that appears on the same page but covers different files. As a result, if a piece of software was released underany version of the SGI Free License B, you can use it under the terms ofthis free version.
This helps toavoid the confusion and antisocial effect described above. We recommend that developers choose alicense that clearly requires preserving notices for their own works because ofthe confusion and antisocial effect that is the result of the 0BSD License. There are currently several variants of XFree86, and only some ofthem use this license.
It includesclauses such as “Each version of the Unicode Standard has furtherspecifications of rights and restrictions of use.” We recommend you use this license for any Perl 4 or Perl 5 packageyou write, to promote coherence and uniformity in Perl programming.Outside of Perl, we urge you not to use this license; it is better touse just the GNU GPL. This license is the disjunction of the Artistic License 1.0 and the GNU GPL—in other words,you can choose either of those two licenses. Check the license notices on the MPL-covered software before you makea Larger Work this way.