The Apache License allows you to freely use, modify, and distribute any Apache licensed product. In , when Berkeley accepted the argument put to it by the Free Software Foundation and retired their advertising clause from the BSD license and formed the modified BSD license, Apache did likewise and created the Apache License version 1.
Removing the advertising clause meant that the advertising materials of the derivative works of any Apache licensed product were no longer required to include the Apache License attribution.
It became ok to include the attribution in the documentation alone. Top 10 Apache License Questions Answered. The Microsoft Public License is a free and open source software license released by Microsoft, which wrote it for its projects that were released as open source. You are free to reproduce and distribute original or derivative works of any software licensed under the Ms-PL license.
Additionally, if you distribute any portion of the software in its source code form, you may do so only under the Ms-PL by including a complete copy of this license with your distribution. If you distribute any portion of the software in its compiled or object code form, you may only do so under any other license that complies with the Ms-PL.
It is important to note that the Ms-PL terms and conditions document is very short, concise and written in a very coherent language. Microsoft wanted to be very clear and direct with the open source community, which also helps the adoption rate as we know from the BSD license. The original BSD License or the 4-clause BSD License also contains an advertising clause and a non-endorsement clause detailed explanation about these clauses are offered in the following questions.
However, you must not remove or make any changes to any copyright, patent or trademark notices contained in the software. You must also retain any notices of licensing or any descriptive text giving attribution to any contributor or the initial developer. When you distribute your software in an executable form any form other than source code , you are required to make the source code available as well under the CDDL. If you want to improve or modify someone else's work, then you need to abide by their license.
If you want to publish your own work then it only matters what you want to accomplish. I don't recommend the RFN option though, as it prevents public forking and merging on sites like Github. A guide to choosing an open source license for your work or project Which open source software license should I use? Walli Feed Image by :. Get the highlights in your inbox every week. There are several big levers available when considering an open source license: How much license reciprocity is required with respect to the software, modifications, and any derivatives someone develops?
What is said about patent licensing and litigation? What legal jurisdiction covers the license? Other considerations in license choice include: Are there project specific affinities? Many companies are concerned about their patent portfolios when creating open source projects.
Google took an interesting approach to the problem when they released the WebM project. It is the nature of IP law that the owner of the property can license it as many ways to as many people as they choose.
Topics Licensing. About the author. Stephen R. Walli - I am a technical executive, a founder, a consultant, a writer, an international business person, a systems developer, a software construction geek, and a standards diplomat. I love to build teams and products that make customers ecstatic. I have worked in the IT industry since as both customer and vendor. I'm a principal program manager in the Microsoft Azure engineering team. Apache License 2. Another big difference between the two licenses is the clear definitions of the used concepts.
The third notable difference is that the Apache License 2. It can be easily used by other projects without having to reword anything in the license document itself, thus making it one of the most popular options for developers who want to avoid spending too much time on dealing with licensing issues.
While the distinctions may seem subtle, they often define the way an open source component can be used and distributed, not to mention the many conditions users are required to comply with along the way. As is always the case in legal matters, the details make all the difference.
The ins and outs of open source licenses is a tricky business, and a comprehensive open source license comparison quite a challenge. Having these basic touchstones to know what to compare can help discern which license is the right fit for your project, or at least make you look smart next time someone in the office mentions license compliance.
If you need legal advice, you should consult with an attorney who has reviewed all relevant facts and applicable law. Ayala Goldstein. Comparison Basics: Permissive vs. The complete guide to Open Source Licenses You can use it to take legal action against those who violate the terms of the license.
But if you plan to release your software for others, including companies, to use, you need a license to dictate how you want your software to be used and distributed.
There are two basic types of open source licenses: permissive and copyleft. Permissive licenses live up to their name by allowing users to do just about anything they want with the code.
Copyleft licenses require that anyone who changes your code for their software also has to release their code. The first question is if your code will be part of a broader open source ecosystem — many open source communities have a few favorite licenses they use. If it will be, consider using the licenses vetted and accepted by your community. Are you building an open source library others will use to create their software?
If you choose a permissive license, users can take your code, change it, and use it in their proprietary software without releasing the code. If you choose a copyleft license, anyone who uses your code will have to share their code in the same way.
Many open source licenses dictate how or if the software can be used in commercial applications.
0コメント