Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The Apache Software Foundation and the Free Software Foundation agree that the Apache License 2.0 is a free software license, compatible with the GNU General Public License [5] (GPL) version 3, [2] meaning that code under GPLv3 and Apache License 2.0 can be combined, as long as the resulting software is licensed under the GPLv3. [6]
The OSI recommends a mix of permissive and copyleft licenses, the Apache License 2.0, 2- & 3-clause BSD license, GPL, LGPL, MIT license, MPL 2.0, CDDL and EPL. License and version FSF approval
Academic Free License; Adaptive Public License; Apache License; Apache License 2.0; Apache License 2.0 with LLVM Exceptions; Apache License v2.0 with LLVM Exceptions; Apache-2.0-with-LLVM-Exception; Apple Public Source License; AROS Public License; Artistic License
The Apache Software Foundation wrote it for their Apache HTTP Server. Version 2, published in 2004, offers legal advantages over simple licenses and provides similar grants. [55] While the BSD and MIT licenses offer an implicit patent grant, [56] the Apache License includes a section on patents with an explicit grant from contributors. [57]
EDUCAUSE (Ref 2 below) says of the ECL, "It is essentially the Apache 2.0 license with a modification of the patent language to make it workable for many colleges and universities." The two patent clauses are reproduced below. The Apache licence patent clause states: "3. Grant of Patent License.
The Apache HTTP Server (/ ə ˈ p æ tʃ i / ə-PATCH-ee) is a free and open-source cross-platform web server, released under the terms of Apache License 2.0.It is developed and maintained by a community of developers under the auspices of the Apache Software Foundation.
While the creation of new licenses slowed down later, license proliferation and its impact are considered an ongoing serious challenge for the free and open-source ecosystem. From the free-software licenses, the GNU GPL version 2 has been tested in to court, first in Germany in 2004 and later in the US. In the German case the judge did not ...
[7] California Western School of Law's newmediarights.com defined them as follows: "The 'BSD-like' licenses such as the BSD, MIT and Apache licenses are extremely permissive, requiring little more than attributing the original portions of the licensed code to the original developers in your own code and/or documentation." [1]