AI tools

Comparison of free and open-source software licenses

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This comparison only covers software licenses which have a linked Wikipedia article for details and which are approved by at least one of the following expert groups: the Free Software Foundation, the Open Source Initiative, the Debian Project and the Fedora Project. For a list of licenses not specifically intended for software, see List of free-content licences.

FOSS licenses

Summarize
Perspective

FOSS stands for "Free and Open Source Software". There is no one universally agreed-upon definition of FOSS software and various groups maintain approved lists of licenses. The Open Source Initiative (OSI) is one such organization keeping a list of open-source licenses.[1] The Free Software Foundation (FSF) maintains a list of what it considers free.[2] FSF's free software and OSI's open-source licenses together are called FOSS licenses. There are licenses accepted by the OSI which are not free as per the Free Software Definition. The Open Source Definition allows for further restrictions like price, type of contribution and origin of the contribution, e.g. the case of the NASA Open Source Agreement, which requires the code to be "original" work.[3][4] The OSI does not endorse FSF license analysis (interpretation) as per their disclaimer.[5]

The FSF's Free Software Definition focuses on the user's unrestricted rights to use a program, to study and modify it, to copy it, and to redistribute it for any purpose, which are considered by the FSF the four essential freedoms.[6][7] The OSI's open-source criteria focuses on the availability of the source code and the advantages of an unrestricted and community driven development model.[8] Yet, many FOSS licenses, like the Apache License, and all Free Software licenses allow commercial use of FOSS components.[9]

General comparison

Summarize
Perspective

For a simpler comparison across the most common licenses see free-software license comparison.

The following table compares various features of each license and is a general guide to the terms and conditions of each license, based on seven subjects or categories. Recent tools like the European Commissions' Joinup Licensing Assistant,[10] makes possible the licenses selection and comparison based on more than 40 subjects or categories, with access to their SPDX identifier and full text. The table below lists the permissions and limitations regarding the following subjects:

  • Linking - linking of the licensed code with code licensed under a different license (e.g. when the code is provided as a library)
  • Distribution - distribution of the code to third parties
  • Modification - modification of the code by a licensee
  • Patent grant - protection of licensees from patent claims made by code contributors regarding their contribution, and protection of contributors from patent claims made by licensees
  • Private use - whether modification to the code must be shared with the community or may be used privately (e.g. internal use by a corporation)
  • Sublicensing - whether modified code may be licensed under a different license (for example a copyright) or must retain the same license under which it was provided
  • TM grant - use of trademarks associated with the licensed code or its contributors by a licensee

In this table, "permissive" means the software has minimal restrictions on how it can be used, modified, and redistributed, usually including a warranty disclaimer. "Copyleft" means the software requires that its source code be made publicly available and that all provisions in the license be preserved in derivative works.

More information License, Author ...
License Author Latest version Publication date Linking Distribution Modification Patent grant Private use Sublicensing TM grant
Academic Free License[11]Lawrence E. Rosen3.02002PermissivePermissivePermissiveYesYesPermissiveNo
Affero General Public LicenseAffero Inc2.02007Copylefted[12]Copyleft except for the GNU AGPL[13]Copyleft[13] ?Yes[13] ? ?
Apache LicenseApache Software Foundation2.02004Permissive[14]Permissive[14]Permissive[14]Yes[14]Yes[14]Permissive[14]No[14]
Apple Public Source LicenseApple Computer2.02003-08-06August 6, 2003Permissive ?Limited ? ? ? ?
Artistic LicenseLarry Wall2.02000With restrictionsWith restrictionsWith restrictionsNoPermissiveWith restrictionsNo
BeerwarePoul-Henning Kamp421998[a]PermissivePermissivePermissiveNoPermissivePermissiveNo
BSD LicenseRegents of the University of California3.0 ?Permissive[15]Permissive[15]Permissive[15]Manually[15]Yes[15]Permissive[15]Manually[15]
Boost Software License ?1.02003-08-17August 17, 2003Permissive ?Permissive ? ? ? ?
Creative Commons ZeroCreative Commons1.02009Public Domain[16][17]Public DomainPublic DomainNoPublic DomainPublic DomainNo
CC BYCreative Commons4.02002Permissive[18]PermissivePermissiveNoYesPermissiveNo
CC BY-SACreative Commons4.02002Copylefted[18]CopyleftedCopyleftedNoYesCopylefted[19]No
CeCILLCEA / CNRS / INRIA2.12013-06-21June 21, 2013PermissivePermissivePermissiveNoPermissiveWith restrictionsNo
Common Development and Distribution LicenseSun Microsystems1.02004-12December 1, 2004Permissive ?Limited ? ? ? ?
Common Public LicenseIBM1.02001-05May 2001Permissive ?Copylefted ? ? ? ?
Cryptix General LicenseCryptix Foundation—1995PermissivePermissivePermissiveManuallyYes ?Manually
Eclipse Public LicenseEclipse Foundation2.02017-08-24August 24, 2017Permissive[20]Copylefted[20][21]Copylefted[20]Yes[20]Yes[20]Copylefted[20]No[20]
Educational Community LicenseIndiana University[22]1.02007Permissive ?Permissive ? ? ? ?
European Union Public LicenceEuropean Commission1.22017-05May 2017Permissive, according to EU law (Recitals 10 & 15 Directive 2009/24/EC)Copylefted, with an explicit compatibility list[23]Copylefted, with an explicit compatibility list[23]Yes[24]Yes[24]Copylefted, with an explicit compatibility list[23]No[24]
FreeBSDThe FreeBSD project—1999-04April 1999Permissive[25]Permissive[25]Permissive[25]Manually[25]Permissive[25]Permissive[25]Manually[25]
GNU Affero General Public LicenseFree Software Foundation3.02007GNU GPLv3 only[26]Copylefted[27]Copylefted[27]Yes[28]Network usage is not considered private use[28]Copylefted[27]Yes[28]
GNU General Public LicenseFree Software Foundation3.02007-06June 2007GPLv3 compatible only[29][30]Copylefted[27]Copylefted[27]Yes[31]Yes[31]Copylefted[27]Yes[31]
GNU Lesser General Public LicenseFree Software Foundation3.02007-06June 2007With restrictions[32]Copylefted[27]Copylefted[27]Yes[33]YesCopylefted[27]Yes[33]
IBM Public LicenseIBM1.01999-08August 1999Copylefted ?Copylefted ? ? ? ?
ISC licenseInternet Systems Consortium—2003-06June 2003PermissivePermissivePermissiveManuallyPermissivePermissiveManually
LaTeX Project Public LicenseLaTeX project1.3c ?Permissive ?Permissive ? ? ? ?
Microsoft Public LicenseMicrosoft— ?CopyleftedCopyleftedCopyleftedNoPermissive ?No
MIT license / X11 licenseMIT—1988Permissive[34]Permissive[34]Permissive[34]Manually[34]Yes[34]Permissive[34]Manually[34]
Mozilla Public LicenseMozilla Foundation2.02012-03January 3, 2012Permissive[35]Copylefted[35]Copylefted[35]Yes[35]Yes[35]Copylefted[35]No[35]
Netscape Public LicenseNetscape1.1 ?Limited ?Limited ? ? ? ?
Open Software License[11]Lawrence Rosen3.02005PermissiveCopyleftedCopyleftedYesYesCopylefted ?
OpenSSL licenseOpenSSL Project— ?Permissive ?Permissive ? ? ? ?
PHP License[36]PHP Group3.012019With restrictionsWith restrictionsWith restrictionsYesYesWith restrictionsManually
Python Software Foundation LicensePython Software Foundation3.9.12020-10-05May 10, 2020PermissivePermissivePermissiveYesPermissivePermissiveNo
Q Public LicenseTrolltech ? ?Limited ?Limited ? ? ? ?
Sleepycat LicenseSleepycat Software—1996PermissiveWith restrictionsPermissiveNoYesNoNo
Unlicenseunlicense.org12010-12December 2010Permissive/Public domainPermissive/Public domainPermissive/Public domain ?Permissive/Public domainPermissive/Public domain ?
W3C Software Notice and LicenseW3C200212312002-12-31December 31, 2002Permissive ?Permissive ? ? ? ?
Do What The Fuck You Want To Public License (WTFPL)Banlu Kemiyatorn, Sam Hocevar22004-12December 2004Permissive/Public domainPermissive/Public domainPermissive/Public domainNoYesYesNo
XCore Open Source License
also separate "Hardware License Agreement"		XMOS ?2011-02February 2011PermissivePermissivePermissiveManuallyYesPermissive ?
XFree86 1.1 LicenseThe XFree86 Project, Inc ? ?Permissive ?Permissive ? ? ? ?
zlib/libpng licenseJean-Loup Gailly and Mark Adler—1995-04-15April 15, 1995PermissivePermissivePermissiveManuallyYesPermissiveManually
Close

Other licenses that don't have information:

More information license, Author ...
license Author Latest version Publication date
Eiffel Forum LicenseNICE22002
Intel Open Source LicenseIntel Corporation— ?
RealNetworks Public Source LicenseRealNetworks ? ?
Reciprocal Public LicenseScott Shattuck1.52007
Sun Industry Standards Source LicenseSun Microsystems ? ?
Sun Public LicenseSun Microsystems ? ?
Sybase Open Watcom Public LicenseOpen Watcom—2003-01-28
Zope Public LicenseZope Foundation2.1 ?
Server Side Public LicenseMongoDB1.02018-10-16
Close

Approvals

Summarize
Perspective

This table lists for each license what organizations from the FOSS community have approved it – be it as a "free software" or as an "open source" license – , how those organizations categorize it, and the license compatibility between them for a combined or mixed derivative work. Organizations usually approve specific versions of software licenses. For instance, a FSF approval means that the Free Software Foundation (FSF) considers a license to be free-software license. The FSF recommends at least "Compatible with GPL" and preferably copyleft. The OSI recommends a mix of permissive and copyleft licenses, the Apache License 2.0, 2- & 3-clause BSD license, GPL, LGPL, MIT license, MPL 2.0, CDDL and EPL.

More information License and version, FSF approval ...
License and version FSF approval
[37]		 GPL (v3) compatibility
[38][39][40][41][42]		 OSI approval
[43]		 Debian approval
[44][45]		 Fedora approval
[46]
Academic Free LicenseYesNoYesNoYes
Apache License 1.xYesNoYesYesYes
Apache License 2.0YesGPLv3 only[47]YesYesYes
Apple Public Source License 1.xNo[48]NoYesNoNo
Apple Public Source License 2.0YesNoYesNoYes
Artistic License 1.0No[note 1]NoYesYesNo
Artistic License 2.0YesYesYesYesYes
Beerware Licensesee "Informal license" section[49]see "Informal license" section[49]NoNoYes[50]
Original BSD licenseYesNoNo[51]YesYes
Revised BSD licenseYesYesYesYesYes
Simplified BSD licenseYesYesYesYesYes
Zero-Clause BSD License??Yes[52]??
Boost Software LicenseYesYesYesYesYes
CeCILLYesYesYesYesYes
Common Development and Distribution LicenseYesGPLv3 (GPLv2 disputed)[53][54][55][56][57][58]YesYesYes
Common Public LicenseYesNoYesYesYes
Creative Commons ZeroYes[59]Yes[59]No[60]YesYes[61]
Creative Commons BY-SA 4.0YesGPLv3[62]?Yes?
Cryptix General LicenseYesYesYesYesYes
Eclipse Public LicenseYesNoYesYesYes
Educational Community LicenseYesYes[63]YesNoYes
Eiffel Forum License 2YesYesYesYesYes
European Union Public LicenceYesYes[23]YesYesYes
GNU Affero General Public LicenseYesYes[26][64]YesYesYes
GNU General Public License v2YesNo[note 2][65]YesYesYes
GNU General Public License v3YesYes[note 3][65]YesYesYes
GNU Lesser General Public LicenseYesYesYesYesYes
GNU Free Documentation LicenseYesNo[66]Yes[67]No[68]No
IBM Public LicenseYesNoYesYesYes
Intel Open Source LicenseYesYesYesNoNo
ISC licenseYes[69]YesYesYesYes
LaTeX Project Public LicenseYesNoYesYesYes
Microsoft Public LicenseYesNoYesNoYes
Microsoft Reciprocal LicenseYesNoYesNoYes
MIT license / X11 licenseYesYesYesYesYes
Mozilla Public License 1.1YesNoYesYesYes
Mozilla Public License 2.0YesYes[note 4][70]YesYesYes
NASA Open Source AgreementNoNoYes?No
Netscape Public LicenseYesNoNoNoYes
Open Software LicenseYesNoYesNoYes
OpenSSL licenseYesNoNoYesYes
PHP LicenseYesNoYesYesYes
Python Software Foundation License 2.0.1; 2.1.1 and newerYesYesYesYesYes
Q Public LicenseYesNoYesNoYes
Reciprocal Public License 1.5NoNoYesNoNo
Sleepycat LicenseYesYesYesYesYes
Sun Industry Standards Source LicenseYesNoYesNoYes
Sun Public LicenseYesNoYesNoYes
Sybase Open Watcom Public LicenseNoNoYesNoNo
UnlicenseYes[71]Yes[59]Yes[72] ?Yes[61]
W3C Software Notice and LicenseYesYesYesYesYes
Do What The Fuck You Want To Public License (WTFPL)Yes[note 5]YesNo[73]YesYes
XFree86 1.1 LicenseYesYes[74]NoNoNo
zlib/libpng licenseYesYesYesYesYes
Zope Public License 1.0YesNoNoNoYes
Zope Public License 2.0YesYesYesNoYes
Close
  1. [N 1]
    The original version of the Artistic License is defined as non-free because it is overly vague, not because of the substance of the license. The FSF encourages projects to use the Clarified Artistic License instead.
  2. [N 2]
    But can be made compatible by upgrading to GPLv3 via the optional "or later" clause added in most GPLv2 license texts.
  3. [N 3]
    But not with GPLv2 without "or later" clause.
  4. [N 4]
    MPL 2.0 is GPL compatible unless marked "Incompatible with Secondary Licenses".
  5. [N 5]
    Listed as WTFPL.

See also

Notes

  1. See footnote of the Beerware article

References

Loading related searches...

Wikiwand - on

Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.