Open Source License GPL, BSD, MIT, Mozilla, Apache and LGPL difference
First, people who are interested in borrowing a fairly clear visual map to divide the various protocols: open source license GPL, BSD, MIT, Mozilla, Apache and LGPL difference
The following is a brief description of the above agreement:
BSD open source license
BSD open source license agreement is to give the user a lot of freedom. Basically users can "do whatever they want", you can freely use, modify the source code can also be modified code as open source or proprietary software re-release.
But "whatever they want" a prerequisite when you use code released BSD agreement, protocol or places BSD code base to do secondary development of their own products, need to meet three conditions:
if re-released product contains the source code, It must have the original code in the source code BSD protocol.
If we publish only a binary library / software, you need to include the original BSD license code in the document libraries and copyright notices / software.
You can not use open source authors / agency name and the name of the original product to do marketing.
BSD code that encourage code sharing, but the need to respect the copyright of the author of the code. BSD By allowing users to modify and redistribute the code, also allows the use or development of commercial software distribution and sales on the BSD code, so it is an integrated business-friendly agreement. And many of the companies in the selection of products when they are open source BSD protocol of choice, because you can completely control these third-party code can be modified or secondary development when necessary.
License 2.0 Apache
Apache License agreements are well-known non-profit organization open source Apache used. The agreement is similar to BSD and also encourage code sharing and respect the original author copyright, also allows code changes, then released (as open source or commercial software). Conditions need to be met and BSD also similar:
the need to code the user an Apache Licence
If you modify the code, need to be modified in the file description.
Extending the code (code and source code modifications are derived) having the same code as the need in the protocol, trademarks, patents, and other statements contained in the original OF predetermined required.
If the re-release of the product is included in a Notice file, the file needs to have in the Notice Apache Licence. You can add your own license in the Notice, but not the performance of the Apache Licence to change the constitution.
Apache Licence also licensed for commercial use friendly. Users can also modify the code as needed to meet the needs and as open source or commercial product launches / sales.
GPL
we are very familiar with Linux is to use the GPL. The GPL and BSD, Apache Licence and so encourage code reuse license very different. The starting point of the GPL open source code / free use and reference / modification / derivative code open source / free, but not allowed to modify the code and derived as a closed-source commercial software distribution and sales. This is why we can use a variety of free linux , including a wide variety of individuals, organizations, commercial software and free software developed by commercial companies on the linux and linux.
The main content of the GPL is to simply use ( "use" refers to the class library reference, the revised code or derivative of this code) GPL agreement in a software product, the software product must also be GPL license must also be both open source and free . This is called "contagious." The GPL products as a separate product without any problems, you can also enjoy free advantage.
Due to the stringent requirements of the use of the GPL GPL library of software products must use the GPL, GPL agreement for the use of open source, commercial software or code division confidentiality requirement is not suitable for integration / adoption as the basis for the development of libraries and secondary .
Other details are similar when re-released as GPL requires accompanying agreements and BSD / Apache and so on.
LGPL
LGPL is a GPL is designed for use primarily open source libraries agreement. And the use of any software requirements GPL / modify / GPL-derived library must use different protocols GPL. LGPL allow commercial software library reference (link) mode without using the open source code library LGPL commercial software. This makes use of the LGPL open source code can be used as a reference library and publish and sell commercial software.
However, if the code changes the LGPL or derivatized, all the modified code, the code involves additional code modifications and derived portions must use the LGPL. Thus the LGPL open source code is very suitable as a third-party commercial software libraries are referenced, but not for those who want to the LGPL code base, and derived by modifying the way to do secondary development of business software used.
GPL / LGPL are the original author of protecting intellectual property rights, prevent people from copying and use of open-source development of similar products
MIT
License MIT and BSD is as wide range of authors want to retain the copyright, without any other restrictions. That you must be included in your distribution in the original license agreement statement, whether you are in binary or source code released released.
MPL
MPL is short for the Mozilla Public license, in early 1998 Netscape Mozilla team of its open source software project design software licenses. The most important reason is the emergence of MPL license, Netscape Company believes that the GPL is not a good balance between the interests of developers the source code and the need for them to use the source code available. Compared with the well-known GPL license and BSD licenses, MPL in many aspects of the agreed rights and obligations and they are the same (since they are in line with the open source software licenses OSIA identified). However, compared to MPL there are several notable differences:
◆ MPL Although modifications to the requirements issued by the MPL license the source code should be a way out sublicense MPL licenses, to ensure that others can share the source code under the terms of the MPL. However, MPL license in the definition of "publication" is "as source code released documents", which means that MPL allows a business plus an interface on their existing source code library, in addition to the source interface program Code-licensing in the form of MPL license, the source code library source code compulsory license out the way you can not MPL license. These, to learn from others on the behavior of the source code used in its own commercial software development left a gap.
◆ paragraph 7 of Article 3 MPL license allows source code licensees will MPL license obtained through their own software program to get yourself mixed with other types of code.
◆ attitude toward software patents, MPL licenses like the GPL license as clearly expressed their opposition software patents, but it clearly requires the provider does not provide the source code of the source code has been subject to patent protection (unless he himself is the patentee, and written free license source code to the public), nor in the source code license to open-source license application form and then go to the source code and related patents.
◆ definition of the source code
and the MPL (1.1 version) license, the definition of the source code is: "refers to the source code form of the work for making modifications choose to take top priority, which includes: all the source code for all modules , together with associated interface definition, plus control and installation of the executable compiled 'original' (description of 'Script'), or is not significantly different from the original source code and the source code is to be selected source contributors program code can be obtained from the public domain. "
◆ MPL license to Rule 3 is a special provision on the source code modification described, is requiring all publishers then had to have a special file on the source code program modification time and modification methods are described.
Transfer: https://www.cnblogs.com/newcaoguo/p/7103249.html
English text: http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/MPL-1.1.html