New answers tagged

2

You must retain the notice and make it clear (at least by the name of the library) which code the MIT license terms apply to. You do not need to make the MIT license terms apply to the software as a whole. (If a license does require this, we call it a "copyleft" license. The MIT license is not a copyleft license.) For example, here is a screenshot ...


4

The MIT license doesn't introduce license concerns in the sense that the MIT license would introduce license incompatibilities or that it would disallow certain uses. But the MIT license does still include a condition for the license: precisely that requirement to keep the copyright & license notice intact. An ELF section or similar embedded metadata ...


3

Hope you have read the license included in the repository . I want to know that do I have to apply for a license to use this code or can I use it without acquiring the license as I'm planning to use/sell it. Yes , You are permitted to use it without acquiring any explicit license. But you have to include the copy right notice as they have clearly stated ...


1

The question is not what your code depends on, but what the program includes. Assuming that your code doesn't include any snippets from these libraries, you can most likely license your source code under whatever license you want. Things are different if you compile or bundle your code along with all dependencies into a program/executable. Now that program ...


3

There are three kinds of people to consider the ignorant, who believe that because your content is available at no cost, they have the freedom to use it as they like the dishonest, who know how copyright works but just don't care and do what they want anyway the honest, who know and care about copyrights For the first two categories, it doesn't really ...


1

If you fully incorporate third-party code in your project, which is the case if that third-party code is a template you base your project on, then the license and copyright notices of the third-party code should be right next to your own license and copyright notice. This means that both should be in the same file, like in your first option. If you use the ...


3

The sole function of the copyright statement in modern, well-managed free software licences is as a chunk of text that must be reproduced verbatim. This from the MIT licence: The above copyright notice [...] shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software. This from Apache 2.0: You must retain, in the Source form of any Derivative ...


-2

First, let me just say that I am not a lawyer, and all I can say on this topic is what I've found online, where non-lawyers tend to give out substantial quantities of bad advice, and there are few legal scholars volunteering free guidance. If anyone can post a more definitive answer to my questions, I will happily withdraw this and chose a better answer, ...


3

The MIT license requires you to preserve the original copyright & license notice as a kind of attribution, but you can make it clear that it's no longer in effect. For example, you might write a license notice like this: Copyright 2020 Your Name All rights reserved. This software is based on libfoobar: Copyright 2017 Original Author (Full text of MIT ...


3

Using MIT licensed and MPL-2.0 licensed dependencies in your closed-source product is legal if you meet these requirements: You have a copy of the MIT license in your documentation. You can precede that copy with a statement that only part of the software is covered by the MIT license. You are not required to identify which part of the software you are ...


Top 50 recent answers are included