Which Open-Source License Fits Your Needs Best?

[lpetrich]

Comparison of free and open-source software licenses - Wikipedia
Open Source Licenses | Open Source Initiative

There are oodles of open-source licenses that various people and organizations have composed, and I find it rather bewildering. In fact, someone composed an article on license proliferation for Wikipedia.

The main features compared in Wikipedia's comparison are

1. Link with code using a different license
2. Release changes under a different license

There are thus three main classes of open-source licenses:

• GPL-like: (1) no, (2) no
• LGPL-like: (1) yes, (2) no
• BSD-like: (1) yes, (2) yes

There are none with (1) no, (2) yes.

The GNU General Public License (GPL) is intended to simulate absence of copyright in the present of copyright. GPLed code also "contaminates" whatever code it is included in, a rather controversial feature.

The Lesser GPL is intended to permit linking of code released on GPL-like terms with code under other licenses, like proprietary code.

BSD-like licenses permit releasing modifications under different licenses, like making them proprietary. The original still remains open.

Even with this classification, there's still a rather sizable field of possibilities in the LGPL-like and BSD-like categories. Any comments or recommendations?

 

[pbuk]

I don't want to make things any more complicated than they need to be so I use the MIT license.