Comparison of free and open-source software licenses

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Template:Short description 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

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

Script error: No such module "Unsubst".

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. Template:Sort-under Template:Sticky header

License Author Latest version Publication date Linking Distribution Modification Patent grant Private use Sublicensing TM grant
Academic Free License[11] Lawrence E. Rosen 3.0 2002 Permissive Permissive Permissive Yes Yes Permissive No
Affero General Public License Affero Inc 2.0 2007 Copylefted[12] Copyleft except for the GNU AGPL[13] Copyleft[13] ? Yes[13] ? ?
Apache License Apache Software Foundation 2.0 2004 Permissive[14] Permissive[14] Permissive[14] Yes[14] Yes[14] Permissive[14] No[14]
Apple Public Source License Apple Computer 2.0 Template:HsAugust 6, 2003 Permissive ? Limited ? ? ? ?
Artistic License Larry Wall 2.0 2000 With restrictions With restrictions With restrictions No Permissive With restrictions No
Beerware Poul-Henning Kamp 42 1998Template:Efn Permissive Permissive Permissive No Permissive Permissive No
BSD License Regents of the University of California 3.0 ? Permissive[15] Permissive[15] Permissive[15] Manually[15] Yes[15] Permissive[15] Manually[15]
Boost Software License Devin Smith[16] 1.0 Template:HsAugust 17, 2003 Permissive Permissive Permissive No Permissive With restrictions No
Creative Commons Zero Creative Commons 1.0 2009 Public Domain[17][18] Public Domain Public Domain No Public Domain Public Domain No
CC BY Creative Commons 4.0 2002 Permissive[19] Permissive Permissive No Yes Permissive No
CC BY-SA Creative Commons 4.0 2002 Copylefted[19] Copylefted Copylefted No Yes Copylefted[20] No
CeCILL CEA / CNRS / INRIA 2.1 Template:HsJune 21, 2013 Permissive Permissive Permissive No Permissive With restrictions No
Common Development and Distribution License Sun Microsystems 1.0 Template:HsDecember 1, 2004 Permissive ? Limited ? ? ? ?
Common Public License IBM 1.0 Template:HsMay 2001 Permissive ? Copylefted ? ? ? ?
Cryptix General License Cryptix Foundation — 1995 Permissive Permissive Permissive Manually Yes ? Manually
Eclipse Public License Eclipse Foundation 2.0 Template:HsAugust 24, 2017 Permissive[21] Copylefted[21][22] Copylefted[21] Yes[21] Yes[21] Copylefted[21] No[21]
Educational Community License Indiana University[23] 1.0 2007 Permissive ? Permissive ? ? ? ?
European Union Public Licence European Commission 1.2 Template:HsMay 2017 Permissive, according to EU law (Recitals 10 & 15 Directive 2009/24/EC) Copylefted, with an explicit compatibility list[24] Copylefted, with an explicit compatibility list[24] Yes[25] yes, but network usage (communication to the public) is considered as a "distribution"[25] Copylefted, with an explicit compatibility list[24] No[25]
FreeBSD The FreeBSD project — Template:HsApril 1999 Permissive[26] Permissive[26] Permissive[26] Manually[26] Permissive[26] Permissive[26] Manually[26]
GNU Affero General Public License Free Software Foundation 3.0 2007 GNU GPLv3 only[27] Copylefted[28] Copylefted[28] Yes[29] Network usage is not considered private use[29] Copylefted[28] Yes[29]
GNU General Public License Free Software Foundation 3.0 Template:HsJune 2007 GPLv3 compatible only[30][31] Copylefted[28] Copylefted[28] Yes[32] Yes[32] Copylefted[28] Yes[32]
GNU Lesser General Public License Free Software Foundation 3.0 Template:HsJune 2007 With restrictions[33] Copylefted[28] Copylefted[28] Yes[34] Yes Copylefted[28] Yes[34]
IBM Public License IBM 1.0 Template:HsAugust 1999 Copylefted ? Copylefted ? ? ? ?
ISC license Internet Systems Consortium — Template:HsJune 2003 Permissive Permissive Permissive Manually Permissive Permissive Manually
LaTeX Project Public License LaTeX project 1.3c ? Permissive ? Permissive ? ? ? ?
Microsoft Public License Microsoft — ? Copylefted Copylefted Copylefted No Permissive ? No
MIT license / X11 license MIT — 1988 Permissive[35] Permissive[35] Permissive[35] Manually[35] Yes[35] Permissive[35] Manually[35]
Mozilla Public License Mozilla Foundation 2.0 Template:HsJanuary 3, 2012 Permissive[36] Copylefted[36] Copylefted[36] Yes[36] Yes[36] Copylefted[36] No[36]
Netscape Public License Netscape 1.1 ? Limited ? Limited ? ? ? ?
Open Software License[11] Lawrence Rosen 3.0 2005 Permissive Copylefted Copylefted Yes Yes Copylefted ?
OpenSSL license OpenSSL Project — ? Permissive ? Permissive ? ? ? ?
PHP License[37] PHP Group 3.01 2019 With restrictions With restrictions With restrictions Yes Yes With restrictions Manually
Python Software Foundation License Python Software Foundation 3.9.1 Template:HsMay 10, 2020 Permissive Permissive Permissive Yes Permissive Permissive No
Q Public License Trolltech ? ? Limited ? Limited ? ? ? ?
Sleepycat License Sleepycat Software — 1996 Permissive With restrictions Permissive No Yes No No
Unlicense unlicense.org 1 Template:HsDecember 2010 Permissive/Public domain Permissive/Public domain Permissive/Public domain ? Permissive/Public domain Permissive/Public domain ?
W3C Software Notice and License W3C 20021231 Template:HsDecember 31, 2002 Permissive ? Permissive ? ? ? ?
Do What The Fuck You Want To Public License (WTFPL) Banlu Kemiyatorn, Sam Hocevar 2 Template:HsDecember 2004 Permissive/Public domain Permissive/Public domain Permissive/Public domain No Yes Yes No
XCore Open Source License
also separate "Hardware License Agreement"		 XMOS ? Template:HsFebruary 2011 Permissive Permissive Permissive Manually Yes Permissive ?
XFree86 1.1 License The XFree86 Project, Inc ? ? Permissive ? Permissive ? ? ? ?
zlib/libpng license Jean-Loup Gailly and Mark Adler — Template:HsApril 15, 1995 Permissive Permissive Permissive Manually Yes Permissive Manually

Other licenses that don't have information:

license Author Latest version Publication date
Eiffel Forum License NICE 2 2002
Intel Open Source License Intel Corporation — ?
RealNetworks Public Source License RealNetworks ? ?
Reciprocal Public License Scott Shattuck 1.5 2007
Sun Industry Standards Source License Sun Microsystems ? ?
Sun Public License Sun Microsystems ? ?
Sybase Open Watcom Public License Open Watcom — 2003-01-28
Zope Public License Zope Foundation 2.1 ?
Server Side Public License MongoDB 1.0 2018-10-16

Approvals

This table lists for each license what organizations from the FOSS community have approved itTemplate:Spaced ndashbe it as a "free software" or as an "open source" licenseTemplate:Spaced ndash, 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.

Template:Sticky header

License and version FSF approval
[38] 		GPL (v3) compatibility
[39][40][41][42][43] 		OSI approval
[44] 		Debian approval
[45][46] 		Fedora approval
[47]
Academic Free License Yes No Yes No Yes
Apache License 1.x Yes No Yes Yes Yes
Apache License 2.0 Yes GPLv3 only[48] Yes Yes Yes
Apple Public Source License 1.x No[49] No Yes No No
Apple Public Source License 2.0 Yes No Yes No Yes
Artistic License 1.0 No[note 1] No Yes Yes No
Artistic License 2.0 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Beerware License see "Informal license" section[50] see "Informal license" section[50] No No Yes[51]
Original BSD license Yes No No[52] Yes Yes
Revised BSD license Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Simplified BSD license Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Zero-Clause BSD License Yes Yes Yes[53] ? Yes
Boost Software License Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
CeCILL Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Common Development and Distribution License Yes Template:Maybe[54][55][56][57][58][59] Yes Yes Yes
Common Public License Yes No Yes Yes Yes
Creative Commons Zero Yes[60] Yes[60] No[61] Yes Yes[62]
Creative Commons BY-SA 4.0 Yes GPLv3[63] ? Yes ?
Cryptix General License Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Eclipse Public License Yes No Yes Yes Yes
Educational Community License Yes Yes[64] Yes No Yes
Eiffel Forum License 2 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
European Union Public Licence Yes Yes[24] Yes Yes Yes
GNU Affero General Public License Yes Yes[27][65] Yes Yes Yes
GNU General Public License v2 Yes No[note 2][66] Yes Yes Yes
GNU General Public License v3 Yes Yes[note 3][66] Yes Yes Yes
GNU Lesser General Public License Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
GNU Free Documentation License Yes No[67] Yes[68] No[69] No
IBM Public License Yes No Yes Yes Yes
Intel Open Source License Yes Yes Yes No No
ISC license Yes[70] Yes Yes Yes Yes
LaTeX Project Public License Yes No Yes Yes Yes
Microsoft Public License Yes No Yes No Yes
Microsoft Reciprocal License Yes No Yes No Yes
MIT license / X11 license Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
MIT No Attribution License Yes Yes Yes ? Yes
Mozilla Public License 1.1 Yes No Yes Yes Yes
Mozilla Public License 2.0 Yes Yes[note 4][71] Yes Yes Yes
NASA Open Source Agreement No No Yes ? No
Netscape Public License Yes No No No Yes
Open Software License Yes No Yes No Yes
OpenSSL license Yes No No Yes Yes
PHP License Yes No Yes Yes Yes
Python Software Foundation License 2.0.1; 2.1.1 and newer Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Q Public License Yes No Yes No Yes
Reciprocal Public License 1.5 No No Yes No No
Sleepycat License Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Sun Industry Standards Source License Yes No Yes No Yes
Sun Public License Yes No Yes No Yes
Sybase Open Watcom Public License No No Yes No No
Unlicense Yes[72] Yes[60] Yes[73] ? Yes[62]
W3C Software Notice and License Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Do What The Fuck You Want To Public License (WTFPL) Yes[note 5] Yes No[74] Yes Yes
XFree86 1.1 License Yes Yes[75] No No No
zlib/libpng license Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Zope Public License 1.0 Yes No No No Yes
Zope Public License 2.0 Yes Yes Yes No Yes

Template:Reflist

See also

Script error: No such module "Portal".

Notes

Template:Notelist

References

Template:Reflist

Template:Open navbox Template:Intellectual property activism

  1. ↑ Open source licenses - Licenses by Name on opensource.org
  2. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  3. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  4. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  5. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  6. ↑ "Relationship between the Free Software movement and Open Source movement", Free Software Foundation, Inc
  7. ↑ "What is Free Software", Free Software Foundation, Inc
  8. ↑ opensource.org/about "Open source is a development method for software that harnesses the power of distributed peer review and transparency of process. The promise of open source is better quality, higher reliability, more flexibility, lower cost, and an end to predatory vendor lock-in."
  9. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  10. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  11. ↑ a b Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  12. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  13. ↑ a b c Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  14. ↑ a b c d e f g Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  15. ↑ a b c d e f g Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  16. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  17. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  18. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  19. ↑ a b cc-by-4-0-and-cc-by-sa-4-0-added-to-our-list-of-free-licenses (2015)
  20. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  21. ↑ a b c d e f g Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  22. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  23. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  24. ↑ a b c d Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  25. ↑ a b c Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  26. ↑ a b c d e f g Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  27. ↑ a b https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl.html : section 13 of the GNU AGPLv3 license
  28. ↑ a b c d e f g h i https://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl-howto.html : GNU licenses copyleft
  29. ↑ a b c Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  30. ↑ https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#IfLibraryIsGPL : If library is under GPLv3
  31. ↑ https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#LinkingWithGPL : Linking with the GNU GPLv3
  32. ↑ a b c Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  33. ↑ https://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl.html : the section 4 of the GNU Lesser General Public License version 3
  34. ↑ a b Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  35. ↑ a b c d e f g Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  36. ↑ a b c d e f g Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  37. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  38. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  39. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  40. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  41. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  42. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  43. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  44. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  45. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  46. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  47. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  48. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  49. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  50. ↑ a b Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  51. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  52. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  53. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  54. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  55. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  56. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  57. ↑ Are GPLv2 and CDDL incompatible? on hansenpartnership.com by James E.J. Bottomley "What the above analysis shows is that even though we presumed combination of GPLv2 and CDDL works to be a technical violation, there's no way actually to prosecute such a violation because we can’t develop a convincing theory of harm resulting. Because this makes it impossible to take the case to court, effectively it must be concluded that the combination of GPLv2 and CDDL, provided you’re following a GPLv2 compliance regime for all the code, is allowable." (23 February 2016)
  58. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  59. ↑ GPL Violations Related to Combining ZFS and Linux on sfconservancy.org by Bradley M. Kuhn and Karen M. Sandler (February 25, 2016)
  60. ↑ a b c Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  61. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  62. ↑ a b Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  63. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  64. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  65. ↑ https://www.gnu.org/licenses/ : "We use only licenses that are compatible with the GNU GPL for GNU software."
  66. ↑ a b Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  67. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  68. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  69. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  70. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  71. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  72. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  73. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  74. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  75. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".


Cite error: <ref> tags exist for a group named "note", but no corresponding <references group="note"/> tag was found

Retrieved from "http://debianws.lexgopc.com/wiki143/index.php?title=Comparison_of_free_and_open-source_software_licenses&oldid=2793061"