...
...
Table 1: Software licences that are frequently used in GÉANT projects or are otherwise significant
Licence | Patent Grant | Note |
Low-Risk Licences (Permissive) | ||
Apache-2.0 | Yes (defensive, broad) | Permissive and widely used. Grants patent rights for using the software. May require reciprocal grants. |
Bouncy Castle License | Not mentioned | Similar to MIT. Primarily used for cryptographic libraries. |
BSD 2-Clause | Not mentioned | Similar to MIT. Simple and widely used with minimal requirements. |
BSD-3-Clause | Not mentioned | Similar to BSD 2-clause. Widely used. Includes a non-endorsement clause for promotional use. |
BSD-4-Clause | Not mentioned | Includes an advertising clause. Less common. |
BSL-1.0 | Not mentioned, implicitly Yes | Business-friendly. Similar to MIT. Used for Boost C++ libraries. |
CC0-1.0 / WTFPL / Unlicense | No for CC0-1.0 | All dedicate works to the public domain. No restrictions but only Unlicense is open source. |
CC-BY-4.0 | No | Attribution licence for creative works. Not intended for software. |
CC-BY-SA-4.0 | No | Strong copyleft. Attribution and share-alike required. For creative works and documents. |
CDDL-1.0 | Yes (essential) | Derived from MPL 2.0. |
CDDL-1.1 | Yes (defensive, essential) | Minor update of CDDL 1.0. Adds patent infringement termination clause. |
Golang BSD + Patents | Yes (defensive, broad) | BSD 3-clause with broad patent grant (like Apache 2.0). |
ISC / 0BSD | Not mentioned | Similar to MIT. Minimal restrictions. |
MIT / X11 | Not mentioned, implicit in USA | Simple and widely used. Minimal restrictions. |
NUnit | Not mentioned, implicit in USA | Minimal restrictions. Used for the NUnit testing framework. |
OpenSSL | Not mentioned | Mix of Apache 1.0 and BSD 4-clause. Includes specific requirements for OpenSSL libraries. Grants rights to essential patents. |
Public Domain | Not mentioned | Not subject to copyright. No restrictions. |
Python-2.0 | Not mentioned | Legacy licence for the Python programming language. |
Zlib | Not mentioned | Minimal restrictions. Used for the zlib compression library. |
Medium-Risk Licences (Mostly Weak Copyleft) | ||
Artistic-1.0 | No | Weak copyleft. Mainly used for Perl. |
Artistic-2.0 | Yes (defensive, essential) | Update of Artistic 1.0. Compatible with GPL 2.0. |
EPL-1.0 | Yes (defensive, essential) | Primarily for Eclipse projects. Grants rights to essential patents. |
EPL-2.0 | Yes (defensive, essential) | Similar to EPL 1.0. Widely used in open source projects. |
EUPL-1.2 | Yes (defensive) | Compatible with GPL. Multi-lingual. Highly compatible. Grants rights to essential patents. |
GPL-2.0-with-classpath-exception | Not mentioned, implicitly Yes | GPL 2.0 with linking exception. Mainly used for Java. |
LGPL-2.0 | Not mentioned, implicitly Yes | Allows linking with non-GPL software. Ensures open source derivatives without affecting the using code. |
LGPL-2.1 | Not mentioned, implicitly Yes | Clarifies linking terms. Allows relicensing under GPL 2.0 or later. |
LGPL-3.0 | Yes (defensive, essential) | Prohibits restrictions on installing or running modified versions. |
MPL-1.1 | Yes (defensive, essential) | Semi-permissive, file-level. Allows combining with GPL code. |
MPL-2.0 | Yes (defensive, essential) | Flexible and widely used. File-level copyleft. |
High-Risk Licences (Strong Copyleft and Network Protective) | ||
AGPL-3.0 | Yes (defensive, essential) | GPL 3.0 with server-side source code disclosure requirement. |
GPL-1.0 | Not mentioned | Early version of GPL. Less common. |
GPL-2.0 | Not mentioned, implicitly Yes | Widely used. Incompatible with GPL 3.0 unless “or later” is included. |
GPL-3.0 | Yes (defensive, essential) | More explicit terms. Incompatible with GPL 2.0-only. |
Additional explanations for patent grants descriptions:
...