Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

68

The short answer: When you fork an existing project, you generally do not have permission to change the license nor do you get copyright on the code you copied over. You do have the copyright on any (nontrivial) modifications or additions that you make. The long answer: The only ways to get copyright on a piece of code is by writing it yourself or by ...


21

Your forked project is a derivative of the original project's code. In other words, your project is using the original project, and thus you are bound by its license. If this were not true, a license would have no point at all. So, no, you can't release code under a proprietary license if it is derived from code that doesn't allow that.


12

Forget about the GPL for a moment, and look at copyright. When you fork a project, all code that was present in the original project is copyright of whoever wrote that code in the original project. All code that you write afterwards is your copyright. So unless you re-write all the code from the original project, that code isn't yours and you have no legal ...


6

is this behaviour is legal according to GPLv2 License statements ? Yes do I have the right to change the name of the modified open source ? Yes Could you please provide justification from licenses with the answer. A name change is just a modification to the source code (etc) that embodies the name, and modification of "the work" is one of ...


3

Open source licenses (including the GPLv2) give you the right to modify a program written by someone else and distribute your modified version. There are few restrictions in the modifications that you can make. The most common restriction is that you can't remove or alter the copyright license. I am not aware of any open source licenses that forbid renaming ...


2

Once GPL, Always GPL. You can't distribute under the BSD if one of the libraries on which your application depends is licensed under GPL, nor can you close your source code. Dual licensing using GPL and a commercial license is a common arrangement among vendors. It basically states that, if you want to use their library for a "true" open-source ...


1

The simple answer is that in most cases and within reasonable limits yes, it's ok. Some provisos. Copyright law gives you two basic mechanisms, which depend somewhat on the country. In many cases the use small pieces of code copied from a large work is permitted as "fair use" or "fair dealing". The limits are not well defined, but the principle is solid. ...


1

I think by saying "Restrictive", they really ment that the license itself did not allow you to redistribute it as closed source only. I see it common for business people to prefer Apache, MIT or BSD licensed code since they allow you to build your own products on top without the "restriction" of having to make your code available.



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible