The free software foundation may publish revised andor new versions of the gnu lesser general public license from time to time. Software engineering stack exchange is a question and answer site for professionals, academics, and students working within the systems development life cycle. That being said, they dont require your parent project to be licensed under compatible licenses. Google gson apache license hsqldb based on bsd hibernate lgpl etc even though i am really not ready to release or sell this ideaprojectsoftware, i was still wondering a bit about what is allowed and what is not allowed in general with these common licenses. Overview start download build create contribute contact. The group open source initiative osi defines and maintains a list of approved opensource licenses.
Osi agrees with fsf on all widely used freesoftware licenses, but differ from fsfs list, as it approves against the open source definition rather than the free software definition. My apachelicensed code can depend on an unmodified lgpllicensed library when it dynamically links with it. The gnu lgpl is very popular among independent developers and companies which mainly deal with open source software. It would be great if duallicense it under apache license or mit. To understand the difference, we will go briefly into what each term means. The gpl, lgpl, and mozilla licenses understanding open. The licenses are incompatible in one direction only, and it is a result of asfs licensing.
Qt dual gplqpl would pick qpl in this case since gpl is not compatible with apache license kdekspread lgpl apache poi library apache software license the apache poi library would essentially work as a. The mit license does not impose even these restrictions on licensees who. Since you have access to the codes through open source software, you are permitted to make changes, improve it, and create your own twist. This means that they impose weak restrictions on subsequent works derived from your work.
The gnu general public license gnu gpl or gpl is a series of widely used free software licenses that guarantee end users the freedom to run, study, share, and modify the software. Track in fossa gnu lesser general public license v2. For details of the requirements of lgplv3, please read the gnu lesser general public license lgpl. The gnu lesser general public license gnu lgpl was designed as a solution for such situations. Gnu lgpl vs gpl lsoftware icensing short transcript. The lesser general public license is sometimes described as a weak copyleft license, because code licensed under lgpls terms can be combined with code under nonfree licenses, and is. The apache license does not place any restrictions on software that links to a plugin or library that is distributed under the apache license. As a reminder, open source software licenses generally allows users to make use of, change, and share the software with.
The gpl, lgpl, and mozilla licenses the licenses described in this chapter are. Gpl is basically the legal terminology that makes open source software what it is. Apache 2 software can therefore be included in gplv3 projects, because the gplv3 license accepts our software into gplv3 works. We have got to know from legal department that we cant use lgpl 2. As used herein, this license refers to version 3 of the gnu lesser general public license, and the gnu gpl refers to version 3 of the gnu general public license. Most surveys indicate that the vast majority of open source projects use the mit license, the apache license, and the gpl or their variants. This is a lax, permissive noncopyleft free software license, compatible with the gnu gpl.
Gnu lesser general public license free software license published by the free software foundation fsf. For example, if you distribute copies of the library, whether gratis or for a fee. Coderay is written by you, i have to claim it to the legal guys. You may copy, distribute and modify the software provided that you state modifications and license them under lgpl2. Unlike the apache license, the gpl embeds the decision as to the codes open source nature into the code itself.
Understanding open source and free software licensing. However, gplv3 software cannot be included in apache projects. Difference between gpl and lgpl difference between. Heres the second post in our open source software license faq series. Differences in distribution, linking, modification, private use of open source licenses like mit, gnu gpl, apache 2. Anything statically linked to the library can only be redistributed under lgpl, but applications that use the library. I found many ruby gem are licensed under apache license or mit. What is the difference between the mozilla public license.
My lgpl3licensed code can depend on an apachelicensed library. Bsdapache debate may not be about developer preferences so much as new business realities. Revised versions of the gnu lesser general public license. The gnu gpl is the most widely used free software license and has a strong copyleft requirement. Weve compiled a list of your top 10 questions about the gpl license in the last post. The general public license has long been the preferred license for opensource businesses, but new analysis suggests that apachestyle licensing may yield more adoption and money. The license allows developers and companies to use and integrate a software component released under the lgpl into their own even proprietary software without being required by the terms of a strong copyleft license to release the source code of their own components. If this is what you want to do, use the gnu library general public license instead of this license. See the gnu lesser general public license for more details. Chemisor, a bsd advocate, is of the opinion that a linguistic misunderstanding may be the root of the disagreements over the difference licensing philosophies. The lgpl has a number of additional conditions that need to be met in order to be able to distribute it in a project with another license.
In some countries, users that download code with no license may infringe merely. The apache license allows you to freely use, modify, and distribute any. Gpl, also known as copyleft, grants permission to reuse or modify the source code to make derivative works, but if you distribute your program to others, it requires you to license your derivative work under the gpl too. Gnu lesser gpl and apache software licenses denver. Various licenses and comments about them gnu project free. The same license that was used for the older version of the mysql client library. If you have some code you are thinking of releasing under an open source license, and you want a quick overview of the broadstrokes differences between these licenses, you have come to the right place.
The free software foundation considers the apache license, version 2. My understanding is that lgpl3 allows this type of use, i would be ok with this too. If you modify the software, you still have to give back the source code, but you are allowed to link it with proprietary. Openclinica, c 20052015 openclinica, llc, is distributed under the gnu lesser general public license gnu lgpl. The incompatibility of apache2 and gpl2 is well documented. Chapter 2, the mit, bsd, apache, and academic free licenses. The differences between the gpl, lgpl and the bsd fosswire. Top 10 apache license questions answered whitesource. Lgpl license is incompatible with apache license issue. If your software is a combinedderivate work withof apache2 software, you cannot license that software under the gpl2 and therefore cannot license it under the lgpl2. This is a comparison of free and opensource software licences. When distributing derived works, the source code of the work must be made available under the same license.
Apache licensing may encourage broader, deeper adoption than the gpl. The licenses were originally written by richard stallman, former head of the free software foundation fsf, for the gnu project, and grant the recipients of a computer program the rights of the free software. You can therefore only license code under the lgpl2. Otherwise, java projects may contain both apachelicensed code and lgpllicensed code without conflict. Difference between different types of open sources licenses. But the real benefit of apachestyle licensing may not be for developers at all, and rather accrue to businesses hoping to drive adoption of their products. Its a popular and widely deployed license backed by a. Let us examine why these corporations stay away from gpl and favor the apache license. The new mariadb client libraries for c and java are distributed under lgpl. In this case, my apachelicensed code may be subject to the lgpl3 terms in general. These include software components covered by a gnu general public license hereafter gpl, a gnu lesser general public license hereafter lgpl or other license agreement. Here are the top open source licenses and their risk categories. Obtaining source code some of the open source software licensors require the distributor to provide the source code with the executable software components. Why corporations favors the apache license over the gpllgpl.
Every so many weeks you find that gpl license advocates attack the bsd license. Such new versions will be similar in spirit to the present version, but may differ in detail to address new problems or concerns. The library refers to a covered work governed by this license, other than an application or a combined work as defined below. The lgpl on the other hand has the requirement that either the lgpl library links dynamically and can be replaced by a user or the entire work must be released under a gplcompatible opensource license. Gnu lesser general public license version 3 open source. The apache license does not place any restrictions on software that links to a plugin or library that is distributed under the apache license the lgpl on the other hand has the requirement that either the lgpl library links dynamically and can be replaced by a user or the entire work must be. Gnu gpl, lgpl, apache licence types and differences slideshare. Here is a list of the components and their licenses. Of these licenses, the apache license is seen pretty infrequently outside of apache software foundation software. The x11 license and the modified bsd license are more or less equivalent. Apache adherents believe that software can be free and is perhaps best when free. Yet, many foss licences, like the apache license, and all free software licences. In simplified terms, lgpl requires shipping of source to the application. To understand the difference between gpl and lgpl you have to understand the basic idea of open source software.
For example, it must be possible for any user of the finished software to modify, recompile or replace the portion of the software that is licensed under the lgpl and use this modified code with the same. This gnu lesser general public license counts as the successor of the gnu. The latest version of the lgpl, version 3 why you shouldnt use the lesser gpl. You should have received a copy of the gnu lesser general public license along with this library. Qt dual gplqpl would pick qpl in this case since gpl is not compatible with apache license kdekspread lgpl apache poi library apache software license the apache poi library would essentially work as a plugin filter to the kspread library. The gnu lesser general public license lgpl is a freesoftware license published by the free software foundation fsf. Gpl and lgpl open source licensing restrictions stack.
Otherwise, java projects may contain both apache licensed code and lgpllicensed code without conflict. Comparison of free and opensource software licences wikipedia. The library refers to a covered work governed by this license, other than an application or a. Gpl, lgpl, apache, bsd, the great thing about open source code is the large amount of high quality code that is available and many embedded projects use foss code as it really speeds up development time. Previous releases of the eiffel license are not compatible with the gpl. Gnu gpl, lgpl, apache licence types and differences. The gnulgpl is very popular among independent developers and companies which mainly deals with open source software. The software freedom law center provides practical advice for developers about including permissively licensed source. The lgpl is similar to the gpl, but is more designed for software libraries where you want to allow nongpl applications to link to your library and utilise it. These attacks are about freedom of sharing the code, and to what degree this should be allowed. It considers free software permissive license group to be a reference implementation of a free software license. All software produced by the apache software foundation or any of its projects or subjects is licensed according to the terms of the documents listed below. Of the remaining four licenses, two of them bsd and mit are considered to be permissive, with the gpl and lgpl being called copyleft licenses.
621 67 224 436 561 857 974 513 545 1046 1172 1199 896 481 338 1233 51 1485 298 590 563 1138 1182 395 1070 1358 918 858 1461 1132 184 1430 1281 1194 64 924 1156 972 96 934 1499 782 1390 1408 314 709 1063