Open Source Market Segment LS
Open Source Market Segment RS
Wednesday, 15 February 2012 12:24

The pluses and minuses of licensing


As the use of free and open source licences for software grows, there is an increasing amount of misinformation being spread about the conditions which such licences impose.

Proponents of open source push their licences as superior; the folk who support free software licences, such as the GPL, do likewise. And those who are selling commercial software under proprietary licences throw mud at both free and open source licences, hoping some will stick.

When the average company wants to find out details of these licences - in order to use free and, often, much better crafted code - it is unlikely to approach either the open source or free software advocates. Nor would such an entity go to the Open Source Initiative or the Free Software Foundation.

More likely, it would approach a commercial entity like Protecode, which develops a product that checks for free and open source licence compliance, for advice. The interpretation of licensing terms that such a company - or its competitors like OpenLogic, Palamida and Black Duck Software - disseminates thus assumes importance.

The chief executive of Protecode, Mahshad Koohgoli, offered to answer a few common questions about free and open source licences; his answers are below.

iTWire: How do you know which products you can charge for based on the type of license used?

Mahshad Koohgoli: None of the recognised open source licenses (recognised means that Open Source Initiative has approved them) place any limitations on commercialisation of projects that use software governed by these licences.  You can charge for your products whether or not they use these open source licenses.  

How do you decide whether or not to use GPL-governed code or projects?

Copyleft or restrictive licenses such as GPL 2.1 would require you to release your code to the public under the same licence. This may or may not be acceptable depending on your business model, and your competitive position, or barriers to entry to your market for others.  Permissive licences such as Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD) licence would be more suitable if you do not wish to make your code available to the whole world.

There are different versions of GPL licences, though. For example LGPL will allow you to link your code to GPL open source software without opening up your own code. GPLv2.1 requires you that you release your code under GPLv2.1 even if you link to such open source software. With GPL, copyleft licences will not apply if you do not distribute your software unless you use open source code governed by an extension of GPLv3 called Affero.

When do you need to make your source code available to the public?

Generally GPL licences can force you to release your code to the public. GPLv2 (version 2) is the most common version of GPL. The following terms apply if you use GPL v2 code in your product and you distribute your product:

If you modify the GPL code, you need to indicate so, include the modification date, and make the modified source code available.

If your end-application has a User Interface (UI), you need to display an appropriate legal notice. Your end-product is automatically licensed under GPL v2.

These terms only apply if your code is derived from GPL code. Simply distributing some GPL package with your product on the same CD does not mean that the terms of those licences apply. If you do not distribute the product then there are no obligations.

GPLv3 (version 3) clarifies a number of loose definitions in the v2 licence and allows certain flexibility in correcting licensing violations. GPLv3 also ensures that you do not use such code in a DRM (Digital Rights Management) product - releasing the source code for such a product would defeat the purpose (of its creation). It also regulates usage in cases where software is covered by certain patents.

Affero GNU Public Licence is an extension of GPLv3 that mostly handles cases when your product using GPL is not distributed, but rather used in a server to provide services to other users. Under this provision, the complete source code must be made available to any user of the server that has AGPL-licensed work (e.g. the web application that uses AGPL code).

Is there a particular category of project that is suited to the GPL or to any other kind of licence?

The GPL licence is generally associated with community projects and those passionate about the ideals of Free and Open Source software, who have a desire to see their code is used and evolved by communities. Again, although GPL licences do not restrict the ability of a business to charge for products based on GPL-governed software, it does force the company to release their source code. This is not necessarily anti-business.  Think of SugarCRM and Asterisk as successful enterprises that have built their business on open-sourced software.

What about the so-called open core licensing? What is your opinion?

Open Core licensing is a model where the core capability/function/module is open source, but then additional functionality and capabilities are built upon, or around, the core that are not open sourced and licensed. It is a very valid business model. It must be applied paying careful attention on the open source licences that govern the code (ie. to avoid any complications, do not use a GPLv3-governed open source core). The reverse of it is what is coined as 'Open Crust' licensing, where open source software is run on a proprietary core (eg. all open source applications that you can run on a Windows machine).

GPL licensing is said to be decreasing in favour of Apache-style licences. True or false? Either way, why?

We have seen an increase in the relative number of new projects that are opened to the community adopting the Apache licence, especially those projects that are released by formal (commercial or governmental) organisations. The GPL and its variants still attract a large number of new open source projects, especially those released by open source ad hoc communities. In terms of the current pool of open source projects and based on the analysis of about 500,000 projects in Protecode's Global IP Signatures (GIPS) database, we see that GPL and its variants still dominate the public domain software.

Read 7579 times

Please join our community here and become a VIP.

Subscribe to ITWIRE UPDATE Newsletter here
JOIN our iTWireTV our YouTube Community here


Thoughtworks presents XConf Australia, back in-person in three cities, bringing together people who care deeply about software and its impact on the world.

In its fifth year, XConf is our annual technology event created by technologists for technologists.

Participate in a robust agenda of talks as local thought leaders and Thoughtworks technologists share first-hand experiences and exchange new ways to empower teams, deliver quality software and drive innovation for responsible tech.

Explore how at Thoughtworks, we are making tech better, together.

Tickets are now available and all proceeds will be donated to Indigitek, a not-for-profit organisation that aims to create technology employment pathways for First Nations Peoples.

Click the button below to register and get your ticket for the Melbourne, Sydney or Brisbane event



It's all about Webinars.

Marketing budgets are now focused on Webinars combined with Lead Generation.

If you wish to promote a Webinar we recommend at least a 3 to 4 week campaign prior to your event.

The iTWire campaign will include extensive adverts on our News Site and prominent Newsletter promotion and Promotional News & Editorial. Plus a video interview of the key speaker on iTWire TV which will be used in Promotional Posts on the iTWire Home Page.

Now we are coming out of Lockdown iTWire will be focussed to assisting with your webinars and campaigns and assistance via part payments and extended terms, a Webinar Business Booster Pack and other supportive programs. We can also create your adverts and written content plus coordinate your video interview.

We look forward to discussing your campaign goals with you. Please click the button below.


Sam Varghese

Sam Varghese has been writing for iTWire since 2006, a year after the site came into existence. For nearly a decade thereafter, he wrote mostly about free and open source software, based on his own use of this genre of software. Since May 2016, he has been writing across many areas of technology. He has been a journalist for nearly 40 years in India (Indian Express and Deccan Herald), the UAE (Khaleej Times) and Australia (Daily Commercial News (now defunct) and The Age). His personal blog is titled Irregular Expression.

Share News tips for the iTWire Journalists? Your tip will be anonymous




Guest Opinion

Guest Interviews

Guest Reviews

Guest Research

Guest Research & Case Studies

Channel News