I use MIT licensed library in program when I publish it how do I create copyright notice for it because I already created LICENSE.md file with license for my project. Note: I didn't edit libraries code I only used it.
1
-
The LICENSE.md file normally contains the license for your own code. For third party code you have to read the license of what you need to do (e.g. the MIT license) and then do those things. For the MIT license the requirements are very easy to meet. It doesn't matter whether you edited the library code or not, because you are still copying it into your project in one way or another, and to copy someone else's code requires permission (i.e. a license).– BrandinFeb 26, 2020 at 9:33
Add a comment
|
2 Answers
In the binary, it's common practise to display the credits in an 'About' section or similar. There you list your programme (version) with credits and license and the names and licenses of the libraries.
See for instance this keepass page as example where the about section is put online on a webpage.
As for your source distribution you likely don't need to change anything: you have your license on your code, the libraries on theirs - irrespective whether you have them inside your repository (then the complete code incl. their license) or not as part of your repo at all.
As uaual: I'm not a layer, take my word with a grain of salt :)
answered Feb 25, 2020 at 17:43
-
I mean my program is not like a GUI program its kind of "game engine" (and it is terminal game engine) and you say i do not have to change anything in my repo if I publish it right? or i have to add something like licenses of all libraries i used? or add some kind of credits? (because my repo dont have one) Because my program is not like this page that you sent link to. But still thx for answer :) Feb 25, 2020 at 17:58
-
1Well, read the licenses of the libraries you use :) If you have no GUI and ship binaries, you will have to find other means to make the license of your binary clear to your users. That can also be in a docs dir which contains detailed info on all used components. If you ship source code you have the obligation to ship the licenses for all the source code you ship; if you included libraries in source code form, you of course, have to retain their license information. Feb 25, 2020 at 18:17
-
-
1@ToggleMountain, no. The license information should be part of the distribution package. If you put your software on an USB stick and send that by mail to someone without internet access, then the recipient must still receive a copy of the copyright licenses. And that should also be the case if someone else does those actions. Feb 26, 2020 at 11:56
-
So technically i can create file called LICENSES.md that contains credit for author of library and license of his library right? Feb 26, 2020 at 12:31
If your program just uses the library, it should be enough to state in your README file that it is being used (and give a --hopefully reliable-- address where to get it, state it's license for potential users of your code with e.g. terminal GNU allergy) and perhaps give instructions to do so in INSTALLING.
Doing so has the advantage that users can benefit from any library updates (might add somewhere "tested with libxyz version 0.0.95" or so), perhaps use the version already installed (by their distribution? for other packages using it?)
-
For the MIT license the license states that you must include the notice "in all copies or substantial portions of the Software" itself. I.e. linking to some other web site or simply mentioning in the README file that you used libxyz version 0.0.95 is not sufficient.– BrandinFeb 26, 2020 at 9:30
-
-
@Brandin, mere use of the library doesn't make the library's license distribution requirements kick in.– vonbrandFeb 26, 2020 at 12:09
-
When you 'use' a library, you are basically copying a binary version into your program. If you distribute your program (the most likely scenario) to someone else, that is a distribution of the library as well. Of course it's possible not to distribute your program and then it would not be distribution of the library either, as you say. But in general I suspect people that are checking about licensing requirements are at least planning to potentially distribute their software at some point.– BrandinFeb 26, 2020 at 13:33