Understanding Open Source Technology & Licensing
Open source technology is pivotal to the modern software world, forming the backbone of numerous frameworks, applications and systems. However, understanding the landscape of open source licenses, ranging from permissive to copyleft ones, is crucial for businesses aiming to maintain their commercial interests.
Types of Open Source Licenses
Permissive licenses and copyleft licenses both abide by the Open Source Initiative’s definition of open source. Users can freely modify permissive-licensed software, rendering it appealing for commercial use. Copyleft licenses, on the other hand, stipulate that modified software versions must carry the same original license, a feature less appealing to proprietorial businesses.
The landscape of open source licenses is complex, offering numerous license options within each category.
Permissive Licenses
MIT License
Originating at MIT in the 1980s, the MIT license is the most popular open source license, used in projects like React and Ruby. However, it does not grant patent rights, creating a possible legal ambiguity for developers using patented technology.
Apache License 2.0
The Apache License 2.0, updated by the Apache Software Foundation in 2004, protects users from litigation with its explicit patent grant. Its complexity, due to the patent grant text, contrasts with the simplicity of the MIT license.
Copyleft Licenses
GNU General Public License (GPL) 2.0 and 3.0
The Free Software Foundation’s GPL, published in 1989, was one of the first general-use copyleft licenses. GPL 3.0, launched in 2007, introduced patent grant provisions and improved compatibility with other open source licenses.
GNU Affero General Public License (AGPL) 3.0
Equal to GPL 3.0 in maintaining open-source modifications, AGPL 3.0 concentrates on web-based services and applications, closing the loophole of server-run software not requiring source code release.
Public Domain and Creative Commons
For software developers wishing to place their work entirely in the public domain, public domain dedications such as the Unlicense or Creative Commons’ CC0-1.0 offer valid alternatives.
“Faux-pen” Source
Multiple other licensing paradigms exist across the software sphere, from dual-license models and open core to licenses that aren’t completely open source compliant, including MongoDB’s Server Side Public License.
Fonte original: Leia a matéria completa no TechCrunch
