This comparison only covers software licenses which have a linked Wikipedia article for details and which are approved by at least one of the following expert groups: the Free Software Foundation, the Open Source Initiative, the Debian Project and the Fedora Project. For a list of licenses not specifically intended for software, see List of free-content licenses.

FOSS licenses

FOSS stands for "Free and Open Source Software". There is no one universally agreed-upon definition of FOSS software and various groups maintain approved lists of licenses. The Open Source Initiative (OSI) is one such organization keeping a list of open-source licenses. The Free Software Foundation (FSF) maintains a list of what it considers free. FSF's free software and OSI's open-source licenses together are called FOSS licenses. There are licenses accepted by the OSI which are not free as per the Free Software Definition. The Open Source Definition allows for further restrictions like price, type of contribution and origin of the contribution, e.g. the case of the NASA Open Source Agreement, which requires the code to be "original" work. The OSI does not endorse FSF license analysis (interpretation) as per their disclaimer.

The FSF's Free Software Definition focuses on the user's unrestricted rights to use a program, to study and modify it, to copy it, and to redistribute it for any purpose, which are considered by the FSF the four essential freedoms. The OSI's open-source criteria focuses on the availability of the source code and the advantages of an unrestricted and community driven development model. Yet, many FOSS licenses, like the Apache License, and all Free Software licenses allow commercial use of FOSS components.

General comparison

For a simpler comparison across the most common licenses see free-software license comparison.

The following table compares various features of each license and is a general guide to the terms and conditions of each license, based on seven subjects or categories. Recent tools like the European Commissions' Licensing Assistant, makes possible the licenses selection and comparison based on more than 40 subjects or categories, with access to their SPDX identifier and full text. The table below lists the permissions and limitations regarding the following subjects:

  • Linking - linking of the licensed code with code licensed under a different license (e.g. when the code is provided as a library)
  • Distribution - distribution of the code to third parties
  • Modification - modification of the code by a licensee
  • Patent grant - protection of licensees from patent claims made by code contributors regarding their contribution, and protection of contributors from patent claims made by licensees
  • Private use - whether modification to the code must be shared with the community or may be used privately (e.g. internal use by a corporation)
  • Sublicensing - whether modified code may be licensed under a different license (for example a copyright) or must retain the same license under which it was provided
  • TM grant - use of trademarks associated with the licensed code or its contributors by a licensee

In this table, "permissive" means the software has minimal restrictions on how it can be used, modified, and redistributed, usually including a warranty disclaimer. "Copyleft" means the software requires that its source code be made available to each user and that all provisions in the license be preserved in derivative works.

LicenseAuthorLatest versionPublication dateLinkingDistributionModificationPatent grantPrivate useSublicensingTM grant
Academic Free LicenseLawrence E. Rosen3.02002PermissivePermissivePermissiveYesYesPermissiveNo
Affero General Public LicenseAffero Inc3.02007CopyleftedCopyleft except for the GNU AGPLCopyleft?Yes??
Apache LicenseApache Software Foundation2.02004PermissivePermissivePermissiveYesYesPermissiveNo
Apple Public Source LicenseApple Computer2.0August 6, 2003Permissive?Limited????
Artistic LicenseLarry Wall2.02000With restrictionsWith restrictionsWith restrictionsNoPermissiveWith restrictionsNo
BeerwarePoul-Henning Kamp421998PermissivePermissivePermissiveNoPermissivePermissiveNo
BSD LicenseRegents of the University of California3.0?PermissivePermissivePermissiveManuallyYesPermissiveManually
Boost Software LicenseDevin Smith1.0August 17, 2003PermissivePermissivePermissiveNoPermissiveWith restrictionsNo
Creative Commons ZeroCreative Commons1.02009Public DomainPublic DomainPublic DomainNoPublic DomainPublic DomainNo
CC BYCreative Commons4.02002PermissivePermissivePermissiveNoYesPermissiveNo
CC BY-SACreative Commons4.02002CopyleftedCopyleftedCopyleftedNoYesCopyleftedNo
CeCILLCEA / CNRS / INRIA2.1June 21, 2013PermissivePermissivePermissiveNoPermissiveWith restrictionsNo
Common Development and Distribution LicenseSun Microsystems1.0December 1, 2004Permissive?Limited????
Common Public LicenseIBM1.0May 2001Permissive?Copylefted????
Cryptix General LicenseCryptix Foundation—N/a1995PermissivePermissivePermissiveManuallyYes?Manually
Eclipse Public LicenseEclipse Foundation2.0August 24, 2017PermissiveCopyleftedCopyleftedYesYesCopyleftedNo
Educational Community LicenseIndiana University1.02007Permissive?Permissive????
European Union Public LicenceEuropean Commission1.2May 2017Permissive, according to EU law (Recitals 10 & 15 Directive 2009/24/EC)Copylefted, with an explicit compatibility listCopylefted, with an explicit compatibility listYesyes, but network usage (communication to the public) is considered as a "distribution"Copylefted, with an explicit compatibility listNo
FreeBSDThe FreeBSD project—N/aApril 1999PermissivePermissivePermissiveManuallyPermissivePermissiveManually
GLWTS LicenseAnonymous1.02025PermissivePermissivePermissiveYesYesPermissiveYes
GNU Affero General Public LicenseFree Software Foundation3.02007GNU GPLv3 onlyCopyleftedCopyleftedYesNetwork usage is not considered private useCopyleftedYes
GNU General Public LicenseFree Software Foundation3.0June 2007GPLv3 compatible onlyCopyleftedCopyleftedYesYesCopyleftedYes
GNU Lesser General Public LicenseFree Software Foundation3.0June 2007With restrictionsCopyleftedCopyleftedYesYesCopyleftedYes
IBM Public LicenseIBM1.0August 1999Copylefted?Copylefted????
ISC licenseInternet Systems Consortium—N/aJune 2003PermissivePermissivePermissiveManuallyPermissivePermissiveManually
LaTeX Project Public LicenseLaTeX project1.3c?Permissive?Permissive????
Microsoft Public LicenseMicrosoft—N/a?CopyleftedCopyleftedCopyleftedNoPermissive?No
MIT license / X11 licenseMIT—N/a1988PermissivePermissivePermissiveManuallyYesPermissiveManually
Mozilla Public LicenseMozilla Foundation2.0January 3, 2012PermissiveCopyleftedCopyleftedYesYesCopyleftedNo
Netscape Public LicenseNetscape1.1?Limited?Limited????
Open Software LicenseLawrence Rosen3.02005PermissiveCopyleftedCopyleftedYesYesCopylefted?
OpenSSL licenseOpenSSL Project—N/a?Permissive?Permissive????
PHP LicensePHP Group3.012019With restrictionsWith restrictionsWith restrictionsYesYesWith restrictionsManually
Python Software Foundation LicensePython Software Foundation3.9.1May 10, 2020PermissivePermissivePermissiveYesPermissivePermissiveNo
Q Public LicenseTrolltech??Limited?Limited????
Ruby LicenseYukihiro Matsumoto2.01995PermissivePermissivePermissiveYesPermissivePermissiveNo
Sleepycat LicenseSleepycat Software—N/a1996PermissiveWith restrictionsPermissiveNoYesNoNo
Unlicenseunlicense.org1December 2010Permissive/Public domainPermissive/Public domainPermissive/Public domain?Permissive/Public domainPermissive/Public domain?
W3C Software Notice and LicenseW3C20021231December 31, 2002Permissive?Permissive????
Do What The Fuck You Want To Public License (WTFPL)Banlu Kemiyatorn, Sam Hocevar2December 2004Permissive/Public domainPermissive/Public domainPermissive/Public domainNoYesYesNo
XCore Open Source License also separate "Hardware License Agreement"XMOS?February 2011PermissivePermissivePermissiveManuallyYesPermissive?
XFree86 1.1 LicenseThe XFree86 Project, Inc??Permissive?Permissive????
zlib/libpng licenseJean-Loup Gailly and Mark Adler—N/aApril 15, 1995PermissivePermissivePermissiveManuallyYesPermissiveManually

Other licenses that don't have information:

licenseAuthorLatest versionPublication date
Eiffel Forum LicenseNICE22002
Intel Open Source LicenseIntel Corporation—N/a?
RealNetworks Public Source LicenseRealNetworks??
Reciprocal Public LicenseScott Shattuck1.52007
Sun Industry Standards Source LicenseSun Microsystems??
Sun Public LicenseSun Microsystems??
Sybase Open Watcom Public LicenseOpen Watcom—N/a2003-01-28
Zope Public LicenseZope Foundation2.1?
Server Side Public LicenseMongoDB1.02018-10-16

Approvals

This table lists for each license what organizations from the FOSS community have approved it – be it as a "free software" or as an "open source" license – , how those organizations categorize it, and the license compatibility between them for a combined or mixed derivative work. Organizations usually approve specific versions of software licenses. For instance, a FSF approval means that the Free Software Foundation (FSF) considers a license to be free-software license. The FSF recommends at least "Compatible with GPL" and preferably copyleft. 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 versionFSF approvalGPL (v3) compatibilityOSI approvalDebian approvalFedora approval
Academic Free LicenseYesNoYesNoYes
Apache License 1.xYesNoYesYesYes
Apache License 2.0YesGPLv3 onlyYesYesYes
Apple Public Source License 1.xNoNoYesNoNo
Apple Public Source License 2.0YesNoYesNoYes
Artistic License 1.0NoNoYesYesNo
Artistic License 2.0YesYesYesYesYes
Beerware Licensesee "Informal license" sectionsee "Informal license" sectionNoNoYes
Original BSD licenseYesNoNoYesYes
Revised BSD licenseYesYesYesYesYes
Simplified BSD licenseYesYesYesYesYes
Zero-Clause BSD LicenseYesYesYes?Yes
Boost Software LicenseYesYesYesYesYes
CeCILLYesYesYesYesYes
Common Development and Distribution LicenseYesGPLv3 (GPLv2 disputed)YesYesYes
Common Public LicenseYesNoYesYesYes
Creative Commons ZeroYesYesNoYesYes
Creative Commons BY-SA 4.0YesGPLv3?Yes?
Cryptix General LicenseYesYesYesYesYes
Eclipse Public LicenseYesNoYesYesYes
Educational Community LicenseYesYesYesNoYes
Eiffel Forum License 2YesYesYesYesYes
European Union Public LicenceYesYesYesYesYes
GNU Affero General Public LicenseYesYesYesYesYes
GNU General Public License v2YesNoYesYesYes
GNU General Public License v3YesYesYesYesYes
GNU Lesser General Public LicenseYesYesYesYesYes
GNU Free Documentation LicenseYesNoYesNoNo
IBM Public LicenseYesNoYesYesYes
Intel Open Source LicenseYesYesYesNoNo
ISC licenseYesYesYesYesYes
LaTeX Project Public LicenseYesNoYesYesYes
Microsoft Public LicenseYesNoYesNoYes
Microsoft Reciprocal LicenseYesNoYesNoYes
MIT license / X11 licenseYesYesYesYesYes
MIT No Attribution LicenseYesYesYes?Yes
Mozilla Public License 1.1YesNoYesYesYes
Mozilla Public License 2.0YesYesYesYesYes
NASA Open Source AgreementNoNoYes?No
Netscape Public LicenseYesNoNoNoYes
Open Software LicenseYesNoYesNoYes
OpenSSL licenseYesNoNoYesYes
PHP LicenseYesNoYesYesYes
Python Software Foundation License 2.0.1; 2.1.1 and newerYesYesYesYesYes
Q Public LicenseYesNoYesNoYes
Reciprocal Public License 1.5NoNoYesNoNo
Sleepycat LicenseYesYesYesYesYes
Sun Industry Standards Source LicenseYesNoYesNoYes
Sun Public LicenseYesNoYesNoYes
Sybase Open Watcom Public LicenseNoNoYesNoNo
UnlicenseYesYesYes?Yes
W3C Software Notice and LicenseYesYesYesYesYes
Do What The Fuck You Want To Public License (WTFPL)YesYesNoYesYes
XFree86 1.1 LicenseYesYesNoNoNo
zlib/libpng licenseYesYesYesYesYes
Zope Public License 1.0YesNoNoNoYes
Zope Public License 2.0YesYesYesNoYes

See also

Notes