Product Description

If you've held back from developing open source or free software projects because you don't understand the implications of the various licenses, you're not alone. Many developers believe in releasing their software freely, but have hesitated to do so because they're concerned about losing control over their software. Licensing issues are complicated, and both the facts and fallacies you hear word-of-mouth can add to the confusion. Understanding Open Source and Free Software Licensing helps you make sense of the different options available to you. This concise guide focuses on annotated licenses, offering an in-depth explanation of how they compare and interoperate, and how license choices affect project possibilities. Written in clear language that you don't have to be a lawyer to understand, the book answers such questions as: What rights am I giving up? How will my use of OS/FS licensing affect future users or future developers? Does a particular use of this software--such as combining it with proprietary software--leave me vulnerable to lawsuits? Following a quick look at copyright law, contracts, and the definition of "open source," the book tackles the spectrum of licensing, including: The MIT (or X), BSD, Apache and Academic Free licenses; The GPL, LGPL, and Mozilla licenses; The QT, Artistic, and Creative Commons licenses; Classic Proprietary licenses; Sun Community Source license and Microsoft Shared Source project The book wraps up with a look at the legal effects--both positive and negative--of open source/free software licensing. Licensing is a major part of what open source and free software are all about, but it's still one of the most complicated areas of law. Even the very simple licenses are tricky. Understanding Open Source and Free Software Licensing bridges the gap between the open source vision and the practical implications of its legal underpinnings. If open source and free software licenses interest you, this book will help you understand them. If you're an open source/free software developer, this book is an absolute necessity.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #251154 in Books
• Published on: 2004-08-16
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 224 pages

About the Author
Andrew M. St. Laurent is an experienced lawyer with a long-time interest in intellectual property, particularly software licensing.

Excerpted from Understanding Open Source and Free Software Licensing by Andrew M. St. Laurent. Copyright © 2004. Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
CHAPTER 2 The MIT, BSD, Apache, and Academic Free Licenses

The MIT and BSD Licenses were two of the earliest open source licenses. Because these licenses are relatively straightforward and illustrate some of the basic principles of open source licensing, they are described here first. The MIT (or X), BSD, and Apache Licenses are classic open source licensing software licenses and are used in many open source projects. The most well-known of these are probably the BSDNet and FreeBSD Unix-like operating systems and the Apache HTTP Server.

These licenses, as applied to the original licensed code, allow that code to be used in proprietary software and do not require that open source versions of the code be distributed. Code created under these licenses, or derived from such code, may go "closed" and developments can be made under that proprietary license, which are lost to the open source community. For the same reason, however, these licenses are very flexible and compatible with almost every form of open source license.

If you’re interested in licenses that keep code from being used in proprietary software, look ahead to Chapter 3.

The Academic Free License is a somewhat more elaborate license, embodying many of the same provisions found in the MIT, BSD, and Apache Licenses; in addition, it includes certain clauses addressing the application of patent rights to open source software.

The MIT (or X) License

The MIT License, the simplest license in this book, begins as follows:

Copyright (c)

Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify,merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:

The and tags obviously refer to the date of publication of the code and the person in whom copyright is vested, which is generally going to be the creator of the code. This part of the license essentially surrenders all of the rights that the copyright holder typically receives, including, as discussed in the previous chapter, the exclusive right to commercially exploit the work and to develop derivative works from the work. In addition, the licensee may, but need not, permit its own licensees to exercise these same rights.

This grant of rights is subject to two conditions:

The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.

And:

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE. [all caps in original]

The first of these two conditions is almost universal in open source licensing and serves the straightforward and necessary purpose of alerting future users of the work of the restrictions on it. (Copyright laws used to require that copyrighted works carry an explicit notice in published forms to receive copyright protection.) The second of the two conditions provides the warranty disclaimer described in the previous chapter.

The BSD License
The BSD License, which is only slightly more restrictive than the MIT License, exists in a number of substantially similar forms. The following example is the UCB/LBL form, named after the University of California at Berkeley and the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory.

This license, like the MIT License, begins:

Copyright (c) ,
All rights reserved.
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met:

The copyright notice and the attribution are substantially the same as those in the MIT License. Again, the license should reflect the actual year of copyright and the correct name of the creator.

Prior to 1999, the BSD License contained the following provision:

All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software must display the following acknowledgement: This product includes software developed by the University of California, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory.

This provision seems relatively innocuous. It seems both reasonable and natural that the creator, having surrendered the exclusive right to commercially exploit a work, should receive credit not only in the acknowledgment of rights but in the advertising as well. It does not challenge the essential premises of open source, as it does not limit the scope of the use of the software in any direct way. Nonetheless, the pre-1999 BSD License sometimes causes problems because of this clause. The principles of open source endorse the commercial exploitation of software, including the sale of software, manuals, and support for profit. Such commercial exploitation very well may include advertising and when an open source project draws from a number of predecessors, the requirement of including such references can become a real burden. The BSD License, however, was amended in 1999 and this clause was removed. The University of California rescinded this clause and to the extent it may still be found in BSD files licensed by the University of California, it no longer has any legal effect.

The remainder of the license largely mirrors the effect of the provisions of the MIT License already described, by conditioning distribution—whether in modified form or not—on the maintenance of the conditions already described:

Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met:

Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.

Customer Reviews

Excellent
This book is essential for anyone with an interest in open-source licensing. The book explains the most important open source software license such as the GPL, LGPL, MIT, Artistic, Mozilla, Qt, ...

The software licenses are described in depth, literally dissecting them paragraph by paragraph. The language is accurate, clear and legalistic - the author is a lawyer and does a rigorous examination of the matters at stake.

You will get an excellent reference for what software licenses are and what is their use, plus for the twists, strengthes and weaknesses of each particular license and how each may adapt to a software projects's objectives (from various development perspectives, commercial, non-commercial or mixed-bag).

The book can be downloaded for free since it's distributed through a Creative Commons license. Still it is well worth the small amount of money you might pay for a printed edition.