Unit 4 The MIT, BSD, Apache Licenses: Structure
Unit 4 The MIT, BSD, Apache Licenses: Structure
Unit 4
Unit 4
Structure:
4.1 Introduction
Objectives
4.2 The MIT (or X) License
4.3 The BSD License
4.4 The Apache License
Versions of Apache License
4.5 Summary
4.6 Terminal Questions
4.7 Answers
4.1 Introduction
By now you must be familiar with the concepts of Open Source Licensing,
Contract and Copyright Law. In this unit, you will learn about the MIT
(Massachusetts Institute of Technology) license, BSD (Berkeley Source
Distribution) license, and Apache license which are used in many open
source projects. These licenses are free software licenses.
We will discuss about MIT/X license, which is the earliest and classic type of
open source licenses and is a very liberal software license which explicitly
states the rights given to the users. We will also discuss the BSD license
which is one of the simple and moderate licenses used for computer
software. We will also learn about Apache license and its versions 1.1 and
2.0. It is similar to other licenses in some way.
After studying this unit, you will analyze that these open source licenses
give you the authority to duplicate, transform, and allocate the content. Also,
you will be able to decide easily which open source license to use, if you are
associated in development of any open source software.
Objectives:
After studying this unit, you should be able to:
define the MIT (or X) license.
describe BSD license.
define Apache license.
list the versions of Apache license.
Sikkim Manipal University
Page No.: 54
Unit 4
Page No.: 55
Unit 4
Page No.: 56
Unit 4
Page No.: 57
Unit 4
original BSD UNIX. They are OpenBSD, NetBSD, FreeBSD, and Darwin
(the foundation of the Mac OS X). Software or products under BSD license
are also frequently incorporated in Linux distributions (i.e., versions), and it
is also been included into some of the Microsoft Windows operating
systems.
BSD licenses original version enclosed a clause called as advertising
clause. This clause stated that all advertising resources or materials that
talk about features of or use of the software must exhibit the acceptance.
For example, This software or product includes software developed by the
University of California, Berkeley and its contributors."
Let us now see the inconveniencies with the advertising clause:
One of the inconveniences arises from the reality that individuals who
made alterations to the source code regularly wanted to have their
names added to the acceptance. This could effortlessly result in large
and awkward acceptances for products with numerous contributors and
for software distributions consisting of multiple individual projects.
A second inconvenience was legal incompatibility with the conditions of
the GPL. This is because the GPL excludes the addition of limitations
further than those that it already inflicts. Thus, it was necessary to
separate out GPL and BSD licensed software within projects.
Initially, the "detestable BSD advertising clause," as it was referred to by
GPL supporters, was used only for the BSD UNIX license. That did not
cause any major inconvenience as it was only essential to comprise a single
sentence of acceptance in any announcement or advertisements.
Nevertheless, other software programmers or developers did not copy the
clause verbatim, but instead replaced the phrase "University of California"
with the name of their own organization. The change in the name also
included the name of the persons involved in it. This resulted in a creation of
slightly diverse licenses and consequently, serious inconveniences when
many such programs were assembled to form a larger work or an operating
system. For example, if a program or an operating system required fifty
slightly different acceptance sentences, each naming a different
programmer or group of programmers, such advertising alone might require
a full page. Not only would this be very monotonous while reading it, but it
could also be costly.
Sikkim Manipal University
Page No.: 58
Unit 4
You must note that the revised BSD license (the BSD license without the
advertising clause) is preferred to MIT/X license because the revised BSD
contains this clause:
Neither the name of the <ORGANIZATION> nor the names of its
contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this
software without specific prior written permission
It is obscured that without such a clause, a receiver of the software would
have had the authority to use the licensor's name anyway; but any possible
doubt is removed with this clause. So, the revised BSD license may be
preferable (to some extent) to MIT/X for organizations concerned about
trademark control.
This is to add-on to your knowledge that, in the year 1999, after two years of
discussion, the Office of Technology Licensing at UCB deleted the foregoing
paragraph of those BSD Unix files containing the acknowledgement within
advertising materials, in its entirety."
This was obviously very practical. However, it could not eradicate the legacy
of the advertising clause. This is because as related clauses still exist in the
licenses of many software or programs that pursued the old BSD license.
Only the programmers or developers of such packages can change them.
BSD is acknowledged a very permissive license, as it permits the
uncontrolled acquiring of source code, for temporary use, for other software
projects with no provision of sharing the source code.
You can choose a BSD style license for research that is of long term or
other projects requiring a development environment that:
Has less cost (nearly zero).
Will develop over a long period of time.
Allows anyone to keep the option of advertising final results with
minimum legal issues.
Self Assessment Questions:
5. The BSD license comes under the range of exceptionally simple and
moderate licenses. (True/False)?
6. Under a typical BSD license the users of released software will not have
a distinct limitation. (True/False)?
Sikkim Manipal University
Page No.: 59
Unit 4
Page No.: 60
Unit 4
As you have now become familiar with the Apache license, let us now
discuss about the different versions of the Apache license.
4.4.1 Versions of Apache License
Apache license includes different versions of the license agreement as
given in the figure 4.1
Page No.: 61
Unit 4
The license ends with clauses recognizing the contributors to the code
being shared or distributed. It is also important to know that these are
not, firmly speaking, parts of the license as they inflict no compulsion on
the user.
The Apache license, Version 2.0
You will now study about the Apache license, version 2.0 which was
produced in 2004, as Apache decided to escape from the BSD model a
little more completely.
This license revision was made to:
lessen the number of frequently asked questions.
give permission to the license to be reusable without transformation
by any other project.
give permission to the license to be appended by reference rather
than getting listed in every file.
make clear the license on submission of contributions.
abolish comments relevant to apache and other derived
acknowledgement notices to a location external to the license terms.
Page No.: 62
Unit 4
Legal entity: The union of the acting entity and all other entities that
control, are controlled by, or are under common control with that
entity.
Page No.: 63
Unit 4
Page No.: 64
Unit 4
6. Trademarks
This license does not provide permission to use the logos, trade names,
service marks, or product names of the licensor.
7. Disclaimer of Warranty
Unless agreed to in writing or required by applicable law, licensor
provides the work (with each contributor providing the contributions) on
an "as is" basis, without warranties or conditions any kind, either
expressed or implied, including, without limitation, any warranties or
conditions of title, non-infringement, merchantability, or fitness for a
particular
8. Limitation of liability
Under no legal theory and in no event, whether in tort (including
negligence), contract, or otherwise, unless required by applicable law
(such as purposeful and grossly neglectful acts) or agreed to in writing,
shall any contributor be liable to you for damages.
9. Accepting warranty or Additional liability
While redistributing the work or derivative works, you may decide to
offer, and charge a fee for, warranty, acceptance of support, insurance,
or other liability obligations and/or rights consistent with this license.
Now, we will study the implementation of the Apache license to any of your
work.
To apply the Apache license to your work, put together the following
boilerplate notice, with the fields enclosed by brackets "[ ]" replaced with
your own recognizing information. (Do not include the brackets!) The text
should be enclosed in the suitable comment syntax for the file format. It is
also recommend that a file or class name and description of purpose be
included on the same "printed page" as the copyright notice for easier
identification within third-party archives.
You must note that acceptance of the Apache license requires you not to
declare any patent rights it may claim against the ASF. Apache-licensed
code is suitable with the proprietary software and the GPL version 3.0 too.
As we discussed earlier that Apache license consists of trademark and
patent provisions, you must observe that this protect open source projects
as they profit in getting more users.
Sikkim Manipal University
Page No.: 65
Unit 4
4.5 Summary
We have studied that the earliest and classic types of open source licenses
are the MIT (or X) and BSD licenses. Most of the projects, which come
under the open source initiative, use the MIT (or X), BSD, and Apache
licenses
As we have learnt that the Massachusetts Institute of Technology initially
developed a moderate license which is called as the MIT license. The MIT
license is similar to the BSD license. A version of UNIX by name Berkeley
Source Distribution used this license first which was developed at the
University of California at Berkeley (UCB). The MIT license is used for many
software packages. Such as: open for business project, X11 and XFree86,
MetaKit, and Expat.
The MIT license is referred as the X11 license, according to the Free
Software Foundation (FSF). This is because the MIT has released more
software under many other licenses as well. X11 is the present edition of the
X Window System, which is the actual paradigm graphical engine for Linux
and other Unix-like operating systems.
Page No.: 66
Unit 4
We have comprehended that the BSD license which is similar to the MIT
license was also developed at the University of California at Berkeley. BSD
licenses original version enclosed a clause called as advertising clause.
The advertising clause stated that all advertising resources or materials that
talk about features of or use of the software must exhibit the acceptance.
We have understood that an Apache license is almost same as other
licenses such as the MIT and BSD licenses. Apache Software Foundation
(ASF) has authored the Apache license which is a free software license.
The Apache license, version 1.1, follows significantly the same model as the
BSD License in premising distribution and modification upon fulfilment with
moderately relaxed terms. Version 2.0, a top-down redrafting of the license,
was first published in the year 2004. The Apache license version 2.0 is a
systematic review of the original Apache license. The Apache license
version 2.0 varies by specifically addressing both patent rights being
granted by the license and the use of other licenses for derivative works
based on works licensed under the Apache license version 2.0.
Glossary
Let us have an overview of the important terms mentioned in the unit:
Detestable: An inspiring or deserving clause of BSD.
Inaptness: Not elegant or graceful in expression with the conditions of the
GPL.
Intricate: An involvement issue with reference to a derivative work.
Mac OS X: It a series of UNIX based operating system, and graphical user
interfaces, developed and marketed by Apple Inc.
Repudiation: The refusal of the liability condition when the user decides to
redistribute the software.
Rescinded: To make void the version of the BSD License.
Page No.: 67
Unit 4
4.7 Answers
Self Assessments Questions
1. Liberal
2. University of California at Berkeley
3. X11.
4. GNU/Linux
5. True
6. False
7. True
8. True
9. Reproduction
10. Authorship
11. True
12. True
Terminal Questions
1. Refer the initial paragraphs of section 4.2 The MIT (or X) License.
2. Refer the initial paragraphs of section 4.3 The BSD License.
3. Refer the initial paragraphs of section 4.4 The Apache License.
4. Refer section 4.4.1 Versions of Apache License v1.1 and v2.0.
5. Refer the middle contents of section 4.3 The BSD License.
References and Suggested Readings
Lawrence E. Rosen (2005), Open source licensing: software freedom
and intellectual property law.
Michael Lucas (2002), Absolute BSD: the ultimate guide to FreeBSD.
Nick Kew (2007), The Apache modules book: application development
with Apache.
E References
http://www.opensource.org/licenses/category.
http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php.
http://www.apache.org/licenses/.
http://producingoss.com/en/license-choosing.html.
Sikkim Manipal University
Page No.: 68