Introduction to Open-Source Licenses

Apache V2 license

Apache licence is a well-known non-profit open-source Apache protocol. Similar to BSD, this Protocol also encourages code sharing and respect for the copyright of the original author. It also allows code modification and re-release (as an open source or commercial software ). The conditions to be met are similar to those of BSD:

1. A copy of Apache licence is required for the code user.

2. If you have modified the code, it is described in the file to be modified.

3. In the extended code (Modification and code derived from source code), the Protocol, trademark, patent statement in the original code and other instructions required by the original author must be included.

4. If the published product contains a notice file, Apache licence must be included in the notice file. You can add your own license to notice, but it cannot be expressed as a change to Apache licence.

Apache licence is also a friendly license for commercial applications. Users can also modify the code as needed to meet their needs and release/sell as open-source or commercial products.

MIT license

The MIT license is derived from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), also known as the "x license" or "X11 license)

The MIT content is similar to the 3-clause BSD license, but it gives software owners greater rights and fewer restrictions.

Authorized persons have the right to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, re-authorize, and sell copies of software and software.

The authorized person may modify the authorization terms as appropriate according to the program's needs.

The copyright statement and license statement must be included in all copies of the software and software.

This authorization clause is not a Copyleft Free Software Authorization Clause and is allowed for use in free/open source software or non-free software.

This is also essentially different between MIT and BSD (the BSD license, 3-clause BSD license.

The MIT clause can coexist with other authorization clauses. In addition, the MIT clause is also a free software Authorization Clause recognized by the FSF and is compatible with GPL.

GPL v2

We are familiar with the use of GPL in Linux. The GPL protocol and BSD, Apache licence, and other licenses that encourage code reuse are very different. The starting point of GPL is the open-source/free use of code and the open-source/free use of reference/modification/derivative code, however, modification and derivative Code cannot be released and sold as commercial software with closed source. That's why we can use a variety of free Linux, including commercial companies' Linux and Linux various free software developed by individuals, organizations, and commercial software companies.

The main content of the GPL protocol is as long as it is used in a software ("use" refers to the class library reference, modified code or derivative code, the software must also adopt the GPL protocol, which is both open-source and free. This is the so-called "contagious ". The GPL protocol product can be used as a separate product without any problems. You can also enjoy the free advantage.

Because GPL strictly requires that software products that use the GPL class library use the GPL protocol, for open source code that uses the GPL protocol, commercial software or departments that require code confidentiality are not suitable for integration/adoption as the basis for class libraries and secondary development.

Other details, such as the GPL Protocol, must be similar to BSD/Apache.

Artistic license 2.0

Artistic license, also known as the art License Agreement (English: artistic license), usually refers to the original art License Agreement (version 1.0), is a free software license, it is mainly used in the officially released perl interpreter and authorization of most CPAN modules. The original art license agreement was developed and released by Perl founder Larry Wall.

BSD 2-clause license

BSD allows users to modify and re-release code (in the form of other Protocols), and allows closed-source commercial release and sales.

BSD encourages code sharing and requires respect for the copyright of the Code author.

To use the BSD Protocol, follow these rules:

1. If the re-release product contains the source code, the BSD Protocol in the original code must be included in the source code;
2. If you only release binary class libraries/software, you need to include the BSD Protocol in the original code in the Library/software documentation and the copyright statement.

Affero GPL

Is a widely used free software license, originally written by affero, Inc. The latest version of this License is "3rd" (V3), which was released on July 6, November 2007. The affero General Public License terms are modified from the GNU General Public License Terms and added to the additional terms to apply the Copyleft clause to applications (such as Web applications) running on the network ), this prevents application service providers from evading the GNU General Public License Terms.

Lgpl V2.1

Lgpl is an open-source protocol designed mainly for class libraries. Unlike GPL, any software that uses/Modifies/derives the GPL class library must use the GPL protocol. Lgpl allows commercial software to use the lgpl class library through class library reference (Link) without the need for open source commercial software code. This allows open source code using the lgpl protocol to be referenced by commercial software as class libraries for concurrent release and sales.

However, if you modify or derive the lgpl protocol code, all the modified Code, the additional code involved in the modification part, and the derived code must adopt the lgpl protocol. Therefore, the open source code of the lgpl protocol is suitable for being referenced by commercial software as a third-party class library, but it is not suitable for the lgpl protocol code, secondary Development of commercial software is implemented through modification and derivative methods.

GPL and lgpl both protect the intellectual property rights of the original author and prevent people from copying and developing similar products using open-source code.

BSD (3-clause) License

BSD allows users to modify and re-release code (in the form of other Protocols), and allows closed-source commercial release and sales.

BSD encourages code sharing and requires respect for the copyright of the Code author.

To use the BSD Protocol, follow these rules:

1. If the re-release product contains the source code, the BSD Protocol in the original code must be included in the source code;
2. If only binary class libraries/software are released, the BSD Protocol in the original code must be included in the document of the Class Library/software and the copyright statement;
3. You cannot use the source code "author/organization name" or "Original Product Name" for marketing.

Eclipse Public License V1.0

EPL allows users to use, copy, distribute, disseminate, present, modify, and disable the source of Secondary commercial release.

To use the EPL Protocol, follow these rules:

1. When a code contributor releases the entire or part of the source code again, it must continue to follow the EPL open source protocol for release, rather than using other protocols for release. unless you are authorized by the original "source code" owner;
2. Under the EPL protocol, you can release the source code without any modification. however, if you want to release the modified source code, or when you release a binary file, you must declare that its source code can be obtained and inform the retrieval method;
3. When you need to mix the source code in EPL with other private source codes into a project for release, you can publish the entire project/product in a private protocol, however, you need to declare which part of the Code is under EPL, and declare that the part of the Code will continue to follow EPL;
4. Independent module (separate module), no need for open source.

Lgpl v3

Compared with lgpl V2, the user is required not only to publish the modified source code, but also to publish the relevant hardware.

Mozilla public license version 2.0

MPL is short for the Mozilla Public License and is a software license designed by the Mozilla team of Netscape for its open-source software project in early 1998. The most important reason for the emergence of the MPL license is that Netscape believes that the GPL license does not properly balance developers' needs for source code and their benefits through source code. Compared with the well-known GPL licenses and BSD licenses, MPL shares many rights and obligations agreements with them (because they comply with open source software licenses recognized by Osia ). However, compared to MPL, there are several notable differences:

• Although MPL requires that modifications to the source code published by the MPL license be allowed again through the MPL license to ensure that others can share the source code under the terms of MPL. However, the definition of "release" in the MPL license is "file published in source code", which means that MPL allows an enterprise to add an interface to its existing source code library, in addition to the MPL license, the source code in the source code library can be forcibly licensed without the MPL license. This makes it easy to use other people's source code for business software development.
• Article 3 of the MPL license section 7th allows licensee to mix the source code obtained through the MPL license with other types of code to obtain their own software programs.
• For software patents, MPL licenses do not explicitly oppose software patents as GPL licenses do, but explicitly require the source code provider not to provide the source code that has been protected by patents (unless he is a patent holder himself, and book for the public free license these source code), you cannot apply for patents related to these source code after the source code is licensed in the form of an open source code license.
• The definition of the source code in the MPL (Version 1.1) license defines the source code as: "The Source Code refers to the most preferred form of modification to the work, which includes: all the source programs of all modules, the definition of related interfaces, and the 'original' (originally 'script') controlling the installation and compilation of executable works '), or the source code that is not significantly different from the initial source code is the program code that can be obtained from the public domain selected by the source code contributor."
• Article 3rd of the MPL license has a special provision on the description of source code modification, that is, all publishers must have a special file to describe the modification time and method of the source code program.

GPL v3

GPL V3 is similar to GPL V2. The difference is that users are not only required to publish the modified source code, but also the relevant hardware.

 

This article from http://git.oschina.net/oschina/git-osc/wikis/License

Introduction to Open-Source Licenses