What licenses are GPL compatible?

These licenses are compatible with the GNU GPL version 2.

• Berkeley Database License (aka the Sleepycat Software Product License)
• Boost Software License.
• CeCILL version 2.
• Clarified Artistic License.
• Cryptix General License.
• EU DataGrid Software License.
• Eiffel Forum License, version 2.
• Expat License.

Is GPL license bad?

The GPL is not a bad license for open source software, it is used by thousands and thousands of projects, and both the rights-holders and users of those projects are in most cases perfectly happy with it.

Is GPL compatible with AGPL?

Please note that the GNU AGPL is not compatible with GPLv2. It is also technically not compatible with GPLv3 in a strict sense: you cannot take code released under the GNU AGPL and convey or modify it however you like under the terms of GPLv3, or vice versa.

Are GPL and MIT compatible?

GPL compatibility. Many of the most common free-software licenses, especially the permissive licenses, such as the original MIT/X license, BSD licenses (in the three-clause and two-clause forms, though not the original four-clause form), MPL 2.0, and LGPL, are GPL-compatible.

Is BSD compatible with MIT?

BSD-licensed projects can be used/redistributed in MIT-licensed projects. The MIT and the BSD 2-clause licenses are essentially identical. BSD 3-clause = BSD 2-clause + the “no endorsement” clause. Issuing a dual license allows users to choose from those licenses—not be bound to both.

Is BSD 3-clause compatible with MIT?

The BSD 3-Clause License has two key requirements of those who want to use the licensed code. They’re actually the same as those of the MIT license. If you plan to copy, modify, or distribute any code licensed under BSD, you must include: The full text of the license.

What is BSD license?

BSD licenses are a low restriction type of license for open source software that does not put requirements on redistribution. As a low restriction and requirement license type, Berkeley Source Distribution (BSD) licenses are used for the distribution of many freeware, shareware and open source software.

Is GPL license good?

SCO’s Chris Sontag argues there are many reasons that the GNU General Public License is bad for the software industry. The General Public License is not good for the software industry for a variety of reasons.

What is the difference between GPL and AGPL?

The difference between the AGPL and traditional GPL is simple: The AGPL seeks to close a “loophole” that allows a company or organization to modify GPL’ed software and use it to provide a service — but without actually distributing changes.

What is the difference between GPLV2 and GPLV3?

GPLV3 is longer compared to the GPLV2 since it almost tried to cover the same issues with the former license. 3. GPLV3 has more clarity on patent licenses, mostly on the wording of the license as it cannot be interpreted as “too broad.” It also applies to the protection of the patents unlike the GPLV2.

Can a GPL be enforced?

But it is sometimes said that the GPL can’t be enforced because users haven’t “accepted” it. After all, the GPL requires each copy of covered software to include the license text, so everyone is fully informed. Despite the FUD, as a copyright license the GPL is absolutely solid.

Is MIT compatible with BSD?

MIT-licensed projects can be used/redistributed in BSD-licensed projects. BSD-licensed projects can be used/redistributed in MIT-licensed projects. The MIT and the BSD 2-clause licenses are essentially identical.

Is the BSD license compatible with GPL?

The license is compatible with the GPL because you can use that source file in a GPL-ed program. By including BSD licensed modules in a program, you are not changing the source code license of those modules to GPL. The clause that makes this specific “BSD-like” licence becoming “copyleft-like” is:

Is GPL Version 2 compatible with GPL Version 3?

One lax license, Apache 2.0, has patent clauses which are incompatible with GPL version 2; since I think those patent clauses are good, I made GPL version 3 compatible with them. The one important exception is the original BSD license, because of the “obnoxious advertising clause.”

What are the different versions of the BSD license?

Now it is important to distinguish between the many different versions of the BSD license. It exists the original4-clause BSD which requiresacknowledgement in advertisements, the modified3-clause BSD which keeps this anti-promotion clause, and a even a 2-clause BSD with none of these clauses (the FreeBSD license).

Does this clause contradict the GPL and the BSD?

I would argue that this clause does not contradict the GPL. The GPL has never given recipients the right to use the author’s names to endorse or promote a product. The BSD merely affirms explicitly that no such right is granted.