Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
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 ...
The Open Source Initiative defines a permissive software license as a "non-copyleft license that guarantees the freedoms to use, modify and redistribute". [6] GitHub's choosealicense website describes the permissive MIT license as "[letting] people do anything they want with your code as long as they provide attribution back to you and don't hold you liable."
This is a list of notable software packages which were published under a proprietary software license but later released as free and open-source software, or into the public domain. In some cases, the company continues to publish proprietary releases alongside the non-proprietary version.
A GitHub study in 2015 on their statistical data found that the MIT license was the most prominent FOSS license on that platform. [38] In June 2016 an analysis of the Fedora Project's packages showed as most used licenses the GPL family, followed by MIT, BSD, the LGP family, Artistic (for Perl packages), LPPL (for texlive packages), and ASL.
License compatibility is a legal framework that allows for pieces of software with different software licenses to be distributed together. The need for such a framework arises because the different licenses can contain contradictory requirements, rendering it impossible to legally combine source code from separately-licensed software in order to create and publish a new program.
This is a list of proprietary source-available software, which has available source code, but is not classified as free software or open-source software.In some cases, this type of software is originally sold and released without the source code, and the source code becomes available later.
The GNU General Public License is an example of a license implementing strong copyleft. An even stronger copyleft license is the AGPL, which requires the publishing of the source code for software as a service use cases. [27] [28] [29] [30]
When initially released, the license did not include the term "and/or", which was changed from "and" by ISC in 2007. [12]Paul Vixie stated on the BIND mailing list that the ISC license started using the term "and/or" to avoid controversy similar to the events surrounding the University of Washington's refusal to allow distribution of the Pine email software. [12]