Even with sites like
https://www.tldrlegal.com
it can still be confusing what can or cannot be done with certain licenses. Here is the situation.
I am a solo developer, I want to make some libraries that can be used to create games. I want to be able to use it to make open source and commercial games. I want to allow other people to make open source and commercial games with it. So I cannot use GPL, because all software made from GPL must also be GPL which means open source, therefore cannot be used commercially.
This is why, so far, I am been using the Apache license. But those license are generally used by bigger companies, not by solo developpers. What is my fear is that somebody can take the code and create a new library and resell it or redistribute it. I don't mind if people use my code, but I don't want them to steal my code.
This is why I am reconsidering LGPL which should allow making open source and commercial products. From what I read, the only restraint is that the library must be dynamically linked (static linking is not allowed). It could complexify software building and distribution, but seems to offer better protection.
Am I understanding this correctly?
The best explanations I found online so far is located here:
https://opensource.stackexchange.com/qu ... -were-made
https://www.tldrlegal.com
it can still be confusing what can or cannot be done with certain licenses. Here is the situation.
I am a solo developer, I want to make some libraries that can be used to create games. I want to be able to use it to make open source and commercial games. I want to allow other people to make open source and commercial games with it. So I cannot use GPL, because all software made from GPL must also be GPL which means open source, therefore cannot be used commercially.
This is why, so far, I am been using the Apache license. But those license are generally used by bigger companies, not by solo developpers. What is my fear is that somebody can take the code and create a new library and resell it or redistribute it. I don't mind if people use my code, but I don't want them to steal my code.
This is why I am reconsidering LGPL which should allow making open source and commercial products. From what I read, the only restraint is that the library must be dynamically linked (static linking is not allowed). It could complexify software building and distribution, but seems to offer better protection.
Am I understanding this correctly?
The best explanations I found online so far is located here:
https://opensource.stackexchange.com/qu ... -were-made
Copyleft or freedom licenses: These are GNU GPL, LGPL and Mozilla Public License. Copyleft licenses are aimed at protecting the freedom of the end-user. Whilst all FOSS licenses involve open sourcing the code, copyleft licenses protect your users' freedom by ensuring that any derived or altered work is also applied the same license. In other words, if you release your software under GPL/LGPL, then whoever modifies your work also has to release it under the same license. This ensures that no proprietary firm can just take your software and make it a closed-sourced, freedom-curbing one. Forgetting this liberal ideology for a moment, if you are a solo developer or a small firm who writes software, then this set of licenses is ideal for you.
Permissive or open-source licenses. These are MIT, Apache, BSD, etc. They are also called do anything licenses, because they give the user of your source, essentially and practically all rights to do anything they want with it. The only difference between them is in the written legalese material, and it is a standard practice in the industry to include this material in a LICENSE file, thus taking care of your fourth requirement (this practice is prevelant for copyleft licenses too). Again, forgetting about the ideology thing that drives the open source camp (innovation in software development by open sourcing), the practical matter is that permissive licenses only make sense if you are a large company like Google. If you are a solo developer or small firm, there is always the risk that a mighter contributor can just fork your code and abuse your IP. If you have used a permissive license, you can't do anything. With copyleft or GPL, you will have at least some recourse in that case.
Statistics: Posted by larienna — 2025-01-04 12:02 — Replies 2 — Views 72