I'm developing an android app which uses two libraries:
- Library A (Apache 2.0 license)
- Library B (MPL-2.0 license)
My question is: is it mandatory to cite these two libraries within the app?
The clause 4 of the Apache 2.0 license states:
(a) You must give any other recipients of the Work or Derivative Works a copy of this License; and
(b) You must cause any modified files to carry prominent notices stating that You changed the files; and
(c) You must retain, in the Source form of any Derivative Works that You distribute, all copyright, patent, trademark, and attribution notices from the Source form of the Work, excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of the Derivative Works; and
(d) If the Work includes a "NOTICE" text file as part of its distribution, then any Derivative Works that You distribute must include a readable copy of the attribution notices contained within such NOTICE file, excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of the Derivative Works, in at least one of the following places: within a NOTICE text file distributed as part of the Derivative Works; within the Source form or documentation, if provided along with the Derivative Works; or, within a display generated by the Derivative Works, if and wherever such third-party notices normally appear. The contents of the NOTICE file are for informational purposes only and do not modify the License. You may add Your own attribution notices within Derivative Works that You distribute, alongside or as an addendum to the NOTICE text from the Work, provided that such additional attribution notices cannot be construed as modifying the License.
I think that:
(b)does not apply because I haven't modified any source file of the library
(c)does not apply because I will not distribute the source code of my app.
(d)does not apply because the library does not have any NOTICE file.
How should I satisfy
(a) if I don't distribute my app source code? Should I create an about page which states that I'm using library A licensed under bla bla?
The clause 3.2 of the MPL 2.0 license states:
3.2. Distribution of Executable Form
If You distribute Covered Software in Executable Form then:
(a) such Covered Software must also be made available in Source Code Form, as described in Section 3.1, and You must inform recipients of the Executable Form how they can obtain a copy of such Source Code Form by reasonable means in a timely manner, at a charge no more than the cost of distribution to the recipient; and
(b) You may distribute such Executable Form under the terms of this License, or sublicense it under different terms, provided that the license for the Executable Form does not attempt to limit or alter the recipients’ rights in the Source Code Form under this License.
Same question: Should I create an about page which states that I'm using library library B and that is licensed under bla bla, giving a link to the original source code repository?