Apr 23, 2013 · Every opensource licence to date (MIT too, a BSD-spirited licence) allows you to use the software on a commercial web site (and that's part of the reasons for the extreme OSS propagation in latter years) with some notable exception.

Dec 21, 2022 · I think I still do not completely understand license language, and therefore the MIT license as being concise and very permissive seems to be a good example to learn on. Considering this sentence: ...

, who happens to be a prominent participant in FOSS IP litigation, the clauses to deal in the Software without restriction and including without limitation already expressly grants patent rights, at least under US law.

How is the MIT licence not viral? Because using code licensed by the MIT License does not require your whole application to be released under the MIT License. Period. In other words, the code that you write yourself is yours. It's copyrighted and licensed by you (you get to choose which license you prefer to use). The portion of code you did not write is still the copyrighted property of the ...

May 15, 2017 · The MIT license is so simple, you should be able to find the answer to your questions by just reading it. It has only one requirement: The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software. This means that you have no obligation to specify that a program is a derivative work, nor to track the modifications that you made ...

If the development goes across January 1, or a repository consists of sources written in different years, can I substitute something like 2013-2017 for <YEAR>? If I add sources to the repositories in later years, will I have to update each license of each repository every year, or will all licenses "expire" on midnight, Jan 1 if I don't?

In addition the MIT license also explicitly allows: However, all these freedoms are implied by the BSD license, because all these activities can be considered "use" and/or "redistribution" of the software. The practical differences between the 2-clause BSD license and the MIT license are marginal. Which one to pick is mostly up to personal taste.

Dec 12, 2022 · @JamesMcLeod, although the MIT license is under 200 words, I think reading it and understanding all its implications are very different things. I feel like the Apache 2.0 patent clause makes it clear that the situation for the MIT license is complex, even if it's short.

Dec 6, 2014 · In layman's terms, software that is licensed with the MIT license is saying "use this any way you wish." And the only exception is that you need to abide by and include their disclaimer of warranty if you keep their portion of code under the MIT license. So let's say you want to take an MIT library and re-release it as only a GPL library.

Oct 11, 2010 · The MIT license is GPL-compatible. Is the GPL license MIT-compatible? i.e. I can include MIT-licensed code in a GPL-licensed product, but can I include GPL-licensed code in a MIT-licensed product? It seems to me that the chief difference between the MIT license and GPL is that the MIT doesn't require modifications be open sourced whereas the ...