Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
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."
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 ...
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.
For example, Netscape drafted their own copyleft terms after rejecting permissive licenses for the Mozilla project. [32] The GPL remains the most popular license of this type, but there are other significant examples. The FSF has crafted the Lesser General Public License (LGPL) for libraries.
Computer History Museum Software License (non-commercial license) [7] Adobe Systems Inc. made the source code of the 1990 version 1.0.1 of Photoshop available to the Computer History Museum . Includes all the code with the exception of the MacApp applications library which was licensed from Apple.
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.
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]
The Unlicense software license, published around 2010, offers a public-domain waiver text with a fall-back public-domain-like license, inspired by permissive licenses but without an attribution clause. [12] [13] In 2015 GitHub reported that approximately 102,000 of their 5.1 million licensed projects, or 2%, use the Unlicense. [note 3]