Search results
- Weak copyleft licenses like the Mozilla Public License 2.0 fill a niche between strong copyleft licenses, such as the GPLs, and permissive ones like MIT or Apache License 2.0. As a result, it serves specific use cases for both authors and companies that rely on open source software.
fossa.com › blog › open-source-software-licenses-101-mozilla-public-license-2-0Open Source Software Licenses 101: Mozilla Public License 2.0
People also ask
What is an example of a strong copyleft license?
What is a weak copyleft license?
What is the difference between a copyleft and a permissive license?
Is MPL a copyleft license?
And, as the MPL license is a weak copyleft license, you are giving the users of your library also the right to distribute it further, which means that selling copies of the software is not sensible from an economics viewpoint.
- Illa Public License 2.0 Requirements
- Illa Public License 2.0 vs. Other Weak Copyleft Licenses
- Illa Public License 2.0 Use Cases
- Future of The Mozilla Public License 2.0
Open source software licenses fall into two categories: permissive and copyleft. Copyleft licenses, in turn, come in two flavors: strong and weak. The Mozilla Public License 2.0 is in the latter group. The difference between the two forms of copyleft licenses lies in the scope of source code to be shared. Strong copyleft licenses like GPL v2 and GP...
Other weak copyleft licenses include the GNU Lesser Public License (LGPL), the Eclipse Public License (EPL), and the Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL). In this section, we’ll compare both with the Mozilla Public License 2.0.
Weak copyleft licenses like the Mozilla Public License 2.0 fill a niche between strong copyleft licenses, such as the GPLs, and permissive ones like MIT or Apache License 2.0. As a result, it serves specific use cases for both authors and companies that rely on open source software.
One recent examinationof projects on GitHub found that approximately 1.4% of works on the platform used the Mozilla Public License 2.0. It was the only weak copyleft license present in any significant number of projects. Couple this fact with its positioning as a “bridge” between GPL-like licenses and permissive ones, and it’s clear MPL 2.0 present...
The Mozilla Public License (MPL) is a free and open-source weak copyleft license for most Mozilla Foundation software such as Firefox and Thunderbird.
- January 3, 2012
- Mozilla Foundation
For example, GPL v2, GPL v3, and AGPL are examples of strong copyleft licenses, while the Mozilla Public License (MPL) maintained by the Mozilla Foundation is a weak copyleft license. The LGPL, or Lesser General Public License, is another example of a copyleft license that falls somewhere between strong and weak copyleft licenses.
Feb 24, 2020 · Weak copyleft licenses. A weak copyleft license is essentially similar to a strong copyleft license, but it does not extend its "viral" protection across linkage boundaries. Modifications to the ...
Short Answer: Open source licenses to avoid: Be cautious of high-risk licenses like GPL and AGPL due to stringent terms, posing legal challenges. Opt for low-risk licenses like Apache, BSD, MIT for flexibility and minimized legal risks. Key is understanding legal implications and ensuring compliance with open source license management practices.
Nov 2, 2021 · The Mozilla Public License, or MPL, is from the Mozilla Foundation and is also considered a weak copyleft license. The difference with this license (in comparison with the Eclipse Public License) is that it is file-based copyleft , which means code can be combined with open-source or proprietary code.
