In the ever-changing realm of technology, open-source software (OSS) serves as a cornerstone for innovation and development. It offers key advantages such as cost efficiency, flexibility, and enhanced innovation through community collaboration. Platforms like GitHub and Hugging Face exemplify this collaborative spirit, facilitating global code sharing and management, as well as democratizing access to advanced machine learning technologies.
Startups extensively adopt open-source software to leverage its cost efficiencies and rapid deployment capabilities, while tech giants like Google, Microsoft, and Meta also utilize and significantly contribute to OSS, showcasing its pivotal role throughout the tech industry.
Bearing in mind the strategic advantages of open-source software, it is essential to delve into the legal aspects that accompany its use. This article will explore the most common software licenses associated with open-source software and their compatibility, providing a comprehensive guide to navigate these legal waters effectively.
MIT License
Named after the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the MIT License is a widely used permissive software license and the most popular license on GitHub. It permits the use, copying, modification, and sale of the software as long as the copyright notice and license terms are included in all copies or substantial parts of the software.
Given that the MIT License does not restrict commercial use, it is a popular choice for businesses that want to use open-source software without the obligation of disclosing proprietary code. However, the software comes without any warranties, and the authors are not liable for any damages arising from its use.
Apache License 2.0
The Apache License 2.0, issued by the Apache Software Foundation, is similar in many ways to the MIT license, allowing free use, modification, distribution, and sale of the software with minimal restrictions. Users must credit the original source in any derivative works. The software comes with no warranty, and the original authors are not liable for damages.
However, the Apache License 2.0 mandates clear documentation of any modifications to the software. Additionally, the license explicitly grants users patent rights from the contributors, providing protection against patent infringement lawsuits. Specifically, if the contributor owns patents that are relevant to the software, it grants users the right to use these patents, thereby safeguarding them from legal claims.
GNU General Public License (GPL)
The General Public License (GPL) is a widely popular, but also controversial open-source license that is both acclaimed and criticized. Created by Richard Stallman in 1989 for the GNU Project, the GPL aims to keep software free for everyone to use, modify, and share. It requires anyone distributing the software, whether altered or not, to also share the same freedoms. The GPL grants users the right to run the program for any purpose, study how the program works, share copies of the program, and distribute modified versions of the program.
A key feature of the GPL is its so-called “copyleft” provision, which means that any modified versions of GPL-licensed software must also be released under the GPL. This ensures that the software remains free and prevents it from becoming proprietary. Some people have compared this license to a virus because the GPL rules apply to any software that includes GPL-licensed parts.
For example, the Linux kernel, which operates under the GNU General Public License (GPL), forms the foundation of the Android mobile operating system. Android incorporates a modified version of this kernel. Similarly, platforms like Facebook run their servers on their own customized versions of the Linux kernel. In both cases, any modifications made to the Linux kernel are required to be disclosed and shared under the same GPL license.
GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL)
The LGPL (Lesser General Public License) is a more permissive version of the GPL, specifically designed for software libraries. This license allows proprietary software to link to libraries under the LGPL without requiring the entire proprietary software to be released under the GPL. This flexibility makes the LGPL suitable for a wider range of development projects, especially those where developers want to combine open source and proprietary software without having to share the source code of the proprietary parts.
License Compatibility
Understanding the compatibility of open-source licenses with each other and with proprietary licenses is essential to avoid legal issues, especially when integrating dozens of software components. Proper knowledge of license compatibility allows for seamless collaboration and innovation, preventing copyright infringement and potential legal disputes.
The MIT License is universally compatible with Apache License, GPL, LGPL, and proprietary licenses. The Apache License also maintains compatibility with the MIT License and proprietary licenses, but only aligns with GPL version 3 and LGPL version 3. The GPL is flexible in its compatibility with the MIT License, Apache License (v3 only), and LGPL, although it generally does not integrate with proprietary licenses. Conversely, the LGPL is compatible with the MIT License, Apache License (v3 only), GPL, and proprietary licenses, albeit with specific conditions that must be met when used with proprietary software.
Key TakeawaysOSS drives innovation and cost efficiency by allowing developers to freely modify and distribute software. Organizations benefit from OSS by reducing software licensing and maintenance costs. However, OSS licenses can be complex and are often not as straightforward as proprietary licenses, with varying requirements and permissions. Understanding these licenses and their compatibility is crucial. Investing time to comprehend them ensures smooth and legal use of OSS in any project. |
***
For additional information, please contact Mr. Matija Markovic, attorney at Doklestic Repic & Gajin.