8

Reading previous discussion I see that it is possible to release binaries under BSD license without releasing the code: Release a BSD-licensed but closed-source program?

However, can a BSD licensed open source project, with multiple contributors and no CLA be closed at any point by the maintainers ?

Of course, there is bound to be some open source version of the code somewhere (forks, tar bal) but still, is there a way to ensure that my contributions will not be pay-walled in the future while contributing to a BSD licensed project ?

Improve this question
5
  • 1
    If you contributed, it is fair to assume that you have a copy of the source code, which, iiuc, you can distribute at will provided you include the original copyright blurb. You can simply upload it somewhere. So what you are afraid of is that somebody (perhaps the current maintainers) continue to develop a closed-source (and commercial) fork that includes your contributions but also valuable improvements you would not have free access to?
    – Peter - Reinstate Monica
    Commented Aug 25 at 9:21
  • TBH I justr put myself into the place of contributors that may not be willing to contribute to permissive licensed project because of reason like this.
    – Mathieu Westphal
    Commented Aug 25 at 10:09
  • License it GPL (or even better, AGPL, or controversially better, SSPL). BSD licenses, by design, allow people to close their modified versions of your software. If you don't want that, you don't want BSD. BSD gives you permission to sublicense (relicense, more-or-less) as GPL, but note the part about retaining the original BSD notice, which is an allowed restriction in GPL.
    – user20574
    Commented Aug 25 at 22:53
  • I want people to be able to close their modified version, while still instill confidence that I will not do that to the main project. LGPL may be a better choice.
    – Mathieu Westphal
    Commented Aug 26 at 12:23
  • This has happened before.
    – Elliott Frisch
    Commented Aug 26 at 23:32

4 Answers 4

Reset to default
10

The only requirement put on users of BSD-licensed source code is to retain the copyright notices during binary distribution. So, yes, access to a BSD-licensed code base can be withdrawn from the maintainers at any time without fear of any (legal) repercussion.

A BSD-licensed programme (or any open source programme) is only open source if the code is actually published. This is required only by strong copyleft licenses like the GPL. The permissive licenses rely on the authors to actually make the code available.

Conversely, this means that a permissive license (as opposed to a strong copyleft license) does NOT give you a guarantee that your code will remain in any distribution of source code when a binary is distributed which contains this code.

Of course, anyone who already got the code under an open-source license can re-publish it also without fear of repercussion; you note that yourself. There is no requirement for the current maintainers to keep distributing any previous version either (and this is true for copyleft licenses, too – only the corresponding source code is required).

Thus – IMHO – if you really want to make sure that your open source contributions remain free and available, you should do one of two things:

  • Host the code yourself (possibly a synced clone of the upstream repository with all the history as long as upstream remains available under an open source license).
  • Use a copyleft license if you cannot or do not want to host the code yourself. In that case, anyone using it in any distributed software has to make sure it remains available.
Improve this answer
0
7

You asked two questions.

Can it be closed at any point by the maintainers ? No, anyone who copied it under the BSD license can continue to use it and distribute copies. But anyone can make additions to the project, and close the version which has their additions. Since just about every program needs changes from time to time, you may feel that this amounts to closing the project.

Is there a way to ensure my contributions will not be paywalled? Yes. Release the version that has your contributions under a GPL license. See the FSF website for details.

Improve this answer
1

OP: However, can a BSD licensed open source project, with multiple contributors and no CLA be closed at any point by the maintainers ?

Yes, the project can be discontinued by the maintainers, but versions of the source code which has already been released, may be archived by the maintainers or made available elsewhere by anyone, in which case it is usable and distributable based on the original BSD license. Also, the project can be forked and resumed, preferably with a new name.

OP: Of course, there is bound to be some open source version of the code somewhere (forks, tar bal) but still, is there a way to ensure that my contributions will not be pay-walled in the future while contributing to a BSD licensed project ?

This can only be prevented using a copyleft license.

I would recommend using a weak copyleft license, so that the copyleft effects do not affect the proprietary software that links to the open source project's software. That would keep the project closer to the spirit of the original BSD license.

I would choose the Mozilla Public License v2.0 (MPL2), as it is a file level weak copyleft license. Its copyleft effects only applies to individual files, and has nothing to do with linking.

To change the license of the project, the agreement of all contributors must be obtained.

Improve this answer
4
  • 1
    "To change the license of the project, the agreement of all contributors must be obtained." Inaccurate, changing from a permissive license like the 3-clause or 2-clause BSD license to a copyleft license is possible without agreement from all contributors. In other words, by releasing under a permissive license the contributors already agreed to allow usage of their sources under a different license.
    – ecm
    Commented Aug 27 at 10:22
  • @ecm, what makes you think so?
    – vonbrand
    Commented Aug 29 at 15:20
  • @vonbrand gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#ModifiedBSD "It is a lax, permissive non-copyleft free software license, compatible with the GNU GPL." Compatible here means you can include code under the modified (3-clause) or simplified (2-clause) BSD license in a program copylefted using a GNU GPL without receiving a separate agreement from all contributors.
    – ecm
    Commented Aug 29 at 16:04
  • @ecm. only the copyright holder can change the license terms. If I take a program P under BSD, add/modify something and distribute resulting P' under GPL, it is only my changes that are under GPL. BSD allows doing that, which isn't "changing licenses" at all. Just like it allows distributing P' as closed source.
    – vonbrand
    Commented Sep 5 at 13:45
-1

If I get source to a program under any license, that license applies to the copy I got. If it is an open source license, I can modify it, share modified or unmodified copies at will (perhaps modified copies have to be renamed, or otherwise marked as such in order not to blame the original author for my blunders). The permissive licenses, like BSD, allow third parties to take the source, modify it and don't share modified sources at all. But originals will still be available.

Improve this answer

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.