How and when had the cc by license become gnu gplcompatible. Gnu general public license version 2 most software distributed under the gplv2 allows for the software to be distributed under later versions of the gpl. This list helps users to understand whether a particular license is a free software license, and whether it is compatible with the gnu general public license gnu gpl. These licenses are incompatible with the gnu gpl version 3. This is a lax, permissive free software license, compatible with the gnu gpl. Since there arent many other free software licenses which require that the entire derived work be distributed under the same license like the gpl does, compatibility issues are.
The free software foundation considers the apache license, version 2. Oct 31, 2014 the organizations traditionally bringing complaints of copyleft noncompliance in historical order, the free software foundation, gpl, the software freedom law center, and the software freedom conservancy all fully investigate and verify complaints referred to them before making contact with apparently noncomplying parties. Aug 26, 2008 early gpl enforcement efforts began soon after the gpl was written by richard stallman in 1989, and consisted of informal community efforts, often in public usenet discussions. As of 2016, the most popular freesoftware license is the permissive mit license. The gpl general public license is the most popular copyleft license. Feel free to add licenses, with a link to their text and if possible a link to a related message in the debianlegal archive or link to. Why is the original bsd license incompatible with the gpl. The need for such a framework arises because the different licenses can contain contradictory requirements, rendering it impossible to legally combine source code from separatelylicensed software in order to create and publish a new program. Earlier licenses are incompatible on their own but are compatible if the works license allows relicensing to a compatible version. A copy of that license is included in this document on page x. How are gplcompatible licenses like mit usable in gpl programs. Jun 29, 2007 the licenses for most software and other practical works are designed to take away your freedom to share and change the works. Is there a chart of which oss license is compatible with.
Please note that this discussion only benefits third parties that produce gpl covered products. The rpsl is a free software license that is gpl incompatible for a number of reasons. The ordinary gnu general public license and the gnu affero general public license are two different copyleft licenses, so they are naturally incompatible. Gnu general public license, version 3 spdx short identifier. The free software foundation maintains a list of licenses, categorized as gpl compatible, gpl incompatible, and nonfree. There are a large number of freelibre open source software floss licenses, but only a few are widely used. Once a program is ed under the gpl, its terms of redistribution are viralthey are passed on to anything else the code gets incorporated into, making it effectively impossible to use gpled code in closedsource programs. Licenses are usually only compatible if at least one is a very permissive license, and you are.
The free software foundation recognizes the wtfpl as a gplcompatible free software license but does not recommend its use. If you want to combine two free programs into one, or merge code from one into the other, this raises the question of whether their licenses allow combining them, or prohibit combining them. Opensourcefree software licenses software licensing. The gpl, lgpl, and mozilla licenses the licenses described in this chapter are very different from those described in chapter 2. The specific occasion for this article is the violation of combining linux with zfs, and that concerns specifically gnu gpl version 2. Based on my reading of their reasoning, it would seem that the lgpl would be similarly affected ianal, please correct me if. This can help answer the most common question, which is whether a license is gpl compatible. The gpl and license compatibility producing open source. We normally use the gnu general public license gnu gpl, but occasionally we use other free software licenses. Frequently asked questions about the gnu licenses gnu. A major difference between the set of permissive and copyleft free software licenses is that when the software is being redistributed either modified or unmodified, permissive licenses do not force the redistributor to open the modified source code. The free software foundation maintains a list of licenses, categorized as gpl compatible, gpl incompatible, and non free.
It is based on code from apache openoffice made available under the apache license 2. 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 definition. Software freedom law center guide to gpl compliance 2nd edition. You can run it on any data interpreted program, any way you like, and there are no requirements about licensing that data to anyone. Can drupal projects depend on or link to gpl incompatible code. A nonfree license is automatically incompatible with the gnu gpl of course, we urge you to avoid using nonfree software licenses, and to avoid nonfree software in general. Unlike most gpl violations conservancy faces, in this case, a thirdparty entity holds a magic wand that can instantly resolve the situation. The license was originally written by richard stallman, former head of the free software foundation fsf, for the gnu project, and grants the recipients of a computer program the rights of the free software definition. However, gplv3 software cannot be included in apache projects. The software included in this product contains ed software that is licensed under the gpl. Interpreting, enforcing and changing the gnu gpl, as applied. The interpreted program, to the interpreter, is just data. Copyleft licenses enforce the publication of the source code under the copyleft license.
This essay argues that developers of freelibre open source software floss, aka ossfs should use an existing widelyused license compatible with the general public license gpl, particularly the gpl, lgpl, mitx, or bsdnew licenses. Jun 26, 2018 this list helps users to understand whether a particular license is a free software license, and whether it is compatible with the gnu general public license gnu gpl. An update to the fsfs list of free software licenses lists the new apache license, version 2. You may be able to find a term in the gpl license terms that alters or restricts the recipients rights in a way that the cddl does not, and then the two licenses are likely incompatible. We use only licenses that are compatible with the gnu gpl for gnu software. Ive made the assertion on several occasions that the mozilla public license mpl is incompatible with the gnu general public license gpl.
This licensing incompatibility applies only when some apache project. This detailed guide gives you an effective open source licenses comparison. Jun 05, 2014 we normally use the gnu general public license gnu gpl, but occasionally we use other free software licenses. The gnu general public license gnu gpl or gpl is a widely used free software license that guarantees end users the freedom to run, study, share, and modify the software. We have set up a special kind of explicit compatibility between them.
The gnu general public license is a popular license, with offerings including linux, such that it is useful to know if the license chosen is compatible with it. The fsf makes two sets of free software licensesone thats gplcompatible, and one thats gplincompatible. Epl eclipse public license, gpl gnu public license. With these conditions, the gpl succeeds in making freedom contagious. Apache 2 software can therefore be included in gplv3 projects, because the gplv3 license accepts our software into gplv3 works. For specific instances, read the license notices for the software package.
With open source licenses explained here, it should help you choose the right open source license for your project. Lots of great free software is available under this license, with strong communities surrounding it. Kuhn, former executive director, have argued against license proliferation since 2000, when they instituted the fsf license list, which urges developers to license their software under gpl compatible free software licenses, though multiple gpl incompatible free software licenses are. Software freedom law center guide to gpl compliance 2nd.
The free software foundationrecommended gnu free documentation license is incompatible with the gpl license, and text licensed under the gfdl cannot be incorporated into gpl software. Because the primary goal of the gpls authors is the promotion of free software, they deliberately crafted the license to make it impossible to mix. The following figure shows how licenses can be combined. This is a simple, permissive noncopyleft free software license, incompatible with the gnu gpl because of its requirements that apply to all documentation in the.
The apache software foundation does not allow its own projects to distribute software under licenses more restrictive than the apache license, and the free software foundation does not distribute software under the apache license. An example of a license that is not compatible would be a license. From the gplincompatible, free software licenses section of one of the links posted in the summaryarticle. As much as i love the work of the free software foundation, their focus has ultimately been anchored from. This incompatibility is not immediately obvious to many readers, so i was asked to explain in detail why mpl and gpl are incompatible. From wiki the apache software foundation and the free software foundation agree that the apache license 2. The gnu general public license is a free, copyleft license for software and other kinds of works. In addition to clarifying the rules about licenses that are already gplcompatible, gplv3 is also newly compatible with a few other licenses. The license is gpl incompatible due to restrictions on the usage of the term php. A permissive software license, sometimes also called bsdlike or bsdstyle license, is a freesoftware license with minimal requirements about how the software can be redistributed. When versata software sued ameriprise financial services for breaching its software license, it unwittingly unearthed a gpl violation of its own and touched off another lawsuit that could prove to be a leading case on free and open source software licensing. Compatible licenses gplv3 wiki free software foundation. Various licenses and comments about them gnu project.
Note that some licenses are very old and predate the popularity of the gnu gpl v1 in 1989, v2 in 1991 or the open source initiative 1998. License compatibility is a legal framework that allows for pieces of software with different software licenses to be distributed together. The foss license exception permits use of the gpllicensed mysql client libraries with software applications licensed under certain other foss licenses without causing the entire derivative work to be subject to the gpl. This makes the resuser free to use the software under any future version of the gpl, and this license incompatibility becomes a nonissue.
These licenses are incompatible with the gnu gpl version 2. Kuhn, former executive director, have argued against license proliferation since 2000, when they instituted the fsf license list, which urges developers to license their software under gpl compatible free software licenses, though multiple gplincompatible free software licenses are. Youre either with us or against us the failure of the. This post takes a look at the legal issues raised by both cases and what they mean for foss producers and users. Why should i use the gnu gpl rather than other free software licenses. Examples include the gnu allpermissive license, mit license, bsd licenses, apple public source license and apache license. In this figure, the boxes are the names of different floss licenses. The software freedom law center provides practical advice for developers about including permissively licensed source. Why isnt the microsoft public license compatible with the gpl. The free software foundation has a faq entry on how to write such an exception. Does the foss license exception apply to all oracle software products, including the mysql database server. Mozilla public license mpl this is a free software license which is not a strong copyleft.
The sharpest dividing line in licensing is that between proprietaryincompatible and proprietarycompatible licenses, that is, between the copyleft licenses and. As a free software license, much of the stewardship and support for the gpl has been driven by the free software foundation. The php license is an open source license according to the open source initiative, and a noncopyleft free software license according to the free software foundation. The free software foundation prefers copyleft sharealike freesoftware licensing rather than permissive freesoftware licensing for most purposes. In that context, we can imagine licenses that are gplincompatible, but do give some interesting permissions to users. Licenses are usually only compatible if at least one is a very permissive license, and you are essentially only bound by the other license.
This is an interesting spin, because most of the gplincompatible licenses are perfile, allowing you to combine them with code under any other license. The fsf free software foundation works to ensure that gpl protects the freedom of all users to modify and distribute code as they see fit. While the gpl is an open source license, it is fundamentally a free software license. I believed that creative commons attribution license, even being noncopyleft one, was always and still is incompatible with gnu gpl because of multiple minor issues. The free software foundation considers epl and gpl to be incompatible. That way, you release your work under multiple licenses. Its list distinguishes between freesoftware licenses that are compatible or incompatible with the fsfs copyleft gnu general public license.
You must use one of the licenses listed on this page for your contribution when you make adaptations of material under bysa or byncsa and share the adaptation, read more compatible licenses. Richard stallman, former president of fsf, and bradley m. The licenses for most software and other practical works are designed to take away your freedom to share and change the works. License compatibility and relicensing gnu project free. Various licenses and comments about them gnu project free. The following licenses do not qualify as free software licenses. I currently have no statistics on how common this practice is. These licenses are incompatible with the gnu gpl version 3 gnu general public license version 2 most software distributed under the gplv2 allows for the software to be distributed under later versions of the gpl. Licenses libreoffice free office suite fun project. The gnu general public license gnu gpl or gpl is a widelyused free software license that guarantees end users the freedom to run, study, share, and modify the software.
The organizations traditionally bringing complaints of copyleft noncompliance in historical order, the free software foundation, the software freedom law center, and the software freedom conservancy all fully investigate and verify complaints referred to them before making contact with apparently noncomplying parties. This is a lax, permissive noncopyleft free software license, compatible with the gnu gpl. These licenses impose substantial limitations on selection from understanding open source and free software licensing book. This is the list of licenses that have been approved by creative commons as compatible with the two creative commons sharealike licenses, cc bysa and cc byncsa. Luckily, when determining which cc licenses permit a work to be combined with gpl software, there are far fewer choices.
Knowing compatibility is important if a developer wants to avail him. The following licenses are free software licenses, but are not compatible with the gnu gpl. The trouble with artwork and free software licenses. A practical guide to gpl compliance software freedom law. This article explains some issues about the meaning and enforcement of the gnu general public license. By contrast, the gnu general public license is intended to guarantee your freedom to share and change all versions of a programto make sure it remains free software for all its users.
So, youre working on that cool new project for a while and youre ready now to make the critical move from closed source to open source. Gpl means nothing for images since it too has not been defined to refer to images. Is there a chart of which oss license is compatible with which. Can drupal projects depend on or link to gplincompatible code. This is a simple, permissive noncopyleft free software license, incompatible with the gnu gpl because of its requirements that apply to all documentation in the distribution that contain acknowledgements. The free software foundation maintains a list of what it considers free. Note that some licenses are very old and predate the popularity of the gnu gpl v1 in 1989, v2 in 1991 or the open source initiative 19. 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. The license is gplincompatible due to restrictions on the usage of the term php debian maintainers have had a longstanding discussion since at least 2005 about the validity of the php license. Youre either with us or against us the failure of the gpl.
Why isnt the microsoft public license compatible with the. The free software foundationrecommended gnu free documentation license is incompatible with the gpl license, and text. Many of the most common free software licenses, such as the. The dfsg and software licenses this page is designed to be a first stop if youre making a new package and are not sure about whether its license allows it to meet the debianfreesoftwareguidelines. Gplincompatible licenses risk lack of support gpl most popular. Libreoffice is made available subject to the terms of the mozilla public license v2. An example is sourcecodeavailable systems that prohibit commercial distribution and forbid modification to the source code. A practical guide to gpl compliance software freedom law center. Lawsuit threatens to break new ground on the gpl and. Frequently asked questions about the gnu licenses gnu project. The noncommercial and no derivatives elements both conflict with the fsfs free software definition, so no license that includes either of these is compatible with the gpl. By far the sharpest dividing line in licensing is that between proprietaryincompatible and proprietarycompatible licenses, that is, between the gnu general public license and everything else. However, these same clauses also make the gpl incompatible with certain other free licenses. The license was originally written by richard stallman, former head of the free software foundation fsf, for the gnu project, and grants the recipients of a computer.
1525 717 1064 748 1039 1477 173 868 1190 1550 219 954 1266 450 1064 1192 141 5 239 853 1095 314 1168 1265 675 1105 705 253 820 1218