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 ...
[9] [10] In 2015, the MIT License was the most popular software license on GitHub, [11] and was still the most popular in 2025 [12] Notable projects that use the MIT License include the X Window System, Ruby on Rails, Node.js, Lua, jQuery, .NET, Angular, and React. License.md Official License Holder: NAJM Norman Al Jawza Mirzam
proprietary license On 16 August 2017, the source code of the game engine was made freely available under proprietary license terms via GitHub. [3] [4] Apple DOS: Apple Inc. 1986 2015 No No No non-commercial license The Apple DOS source code was released by the Computer History Museum [5] after Paul Laughton, the creator of the code, donated it ...
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.
The Humanitarian-FOSS project at Trinity College recognized the "version 42" beerware license variant as an extremely permissive "copyright only" and GPL-compatible license. [3] According to the Free Software Foundation the license would be classified as an "informal" free, non-copyleft and GPL-compatible license, however more detailed licenses ...
The license was confirmed as a GPL-compatible free software license by the Free Software Foundation, but its use is "not recommended". [1] In 2009, the Open Source Initiative chose not to approve the license as an open-source license due to redundancy with the Fair License. [2] The WTFPL version 2 is an accepted Copyfree license. [14]
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