I would like to justify whether my concept in the open source license is correct, as you know that, misunderstanding the terms may lead to a serious law sue.
The main difference among the open source license is whether the license is copyleft. Copyleft license means allow the others to reproduce, modify and distribute the products but the released product is bound by the same licensing restriction. That means they have to use the same license for the modified version. Also, the copyleft license require all the released modified version to be free software.
On the other hand, if any others create derived work incorporating non-copyleft licensed code, they can choose any license for the code.
The several kinds of license and comparison
GPL is a restrictive license. Software requires to released as GPL license if that integrate or is modified from the other GPL license software . The library used in developing GPL license software are also restricted to GPL and LGPL , proprietary software are not allowed to employ (or complied with) in any part of the GPL application.
LGPL is similar to GPL , but was more permissive with regarding allow the using of other non-GPL software.
BSD is relatively simple license, it allow developer to do anything on the original source code . The license holder do not hold any legal responsibilities for their released product.
Apache license is evolved from the BSD license. The legal terms are improved and are written by legal professionals in a more modern way. It covers comprehensive intellectual property ownership and liability issues.
Also, are there any popular license beside these?