Code Project Open License

Last updated
Code Project Open License
Author The Code Project
Latest version 1.02
Publisher The Code Project
Published April 15, 2008
DFSG compatible No [1]
FSF approved No [2]
OSI approved No [3]
GPL compatible No [2]
Copyleft No [2]
Linking from code with a different license Unclear
Website www.codeproject.com/info/cpol10.aspx

The Code Project Open License (CPOL) is a software license published by The Code Project, a community site for software developers. The license is mainly applied to content that is being published on the site.

Contents

License

The main points subject to the terms of the license are: [4]

In copyright law, a derivative work is an expressive creation that includes major copyright-protected elements of an original, previously created first work. The derivative work becomes a second, separate work independent in form from the first. The transformation, modification or adaptation of the work must be substantial and bear its author's personality sufficiently to be original and thus protected by copyright. Translations, cinematic adaptations and musical arrangements are common types of derivative works.

The license itself grants copyright and patent protection to the developer. The Code Project has a comparison of the CPOL to open-source licenses on their site. Further, the license provides a distinction and clarification between the source code available for download and the source code's author's articles and writings about that content.

An open-source license is a type of license for computer software and other products that allows the source code, blueprint or design to be used, modified and/or shared under defined terms and conditions. This allows end users and commercial companies to review and modify the source code, blueprint or design for their own customization, curiosity or troubleshooting needs. Open-source licensed software is mostly available free of charge, though this does not necessarily have to be the case. Licenses which only permit non-commercial redistribution or modification of the source code for personal use only are generally not considered as open-source licenses. However, open-source licenses may have some restrictions, particularly regarding the expression of respect to the origin of software, such as a requirement to preserve the name of the authors and a copyright statement within the code, or a requirement to redistribute the licensed software only under the same license. One popular set of open-source software licenses are those approved by the Open Source Initiative (OSI) based on their Open Source Definition (OSD).

Status as an open-source license

The "Open" in the name Code Project Open License refers to the license offering accessibility to the software's source code. The license is not "Open" as defined by the Open Source Initiative [5] because it places restrictions on how the software can be used, such as forbidding its use in illegal, immoral or improper material as well as a prohibition on commercial distribution of the code in isolation.

Open Source Initiative non-profit organization promoting open-source software

The Open Source Initiative (OSI) is a non-profit organization dedicated to promoting open-source software.

The CPOL is strictly for source code that is gratis, but is not recognized as a free or open license by the Free Software Foundation due to the restrictions within the CPOL forbidding usage for illegal purposes and the restrictions on selling the code without coupling it to a larger application. [6] The license is thus incompatible with the GNU General Public License and some other free software licenses, and inconsistent with the Open Source Definition, which requires that a license not discriminate against fields of endeavor. The Apache Software Foundation does not accept code under this license. [7]

<i>Gratis</i> versus <i>libre</i> distinction between concepts

The English adjective free is commonly used in one of two meanings: "for free" (gratis) and "with little or no restriction" (libre). This ambiguity of free can cause issues where the distinction is important, as it often is in dealing with laws concerning the use of information, such as copyright and patents.

The Free Software Foundation (FSF) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization founded by Richard Stallman on 4 October 1985 to support the free software movement, which promotes the universal freedom to study, distribute, create, and modify computer software, with the organization's preference for software being distributed under copyleft terms, such as with its own GNU General Public License. The FSF was incorporated in Massachusetts, US, where it is also based.

GNU General Public License set of free software licenses

The GNU General Public License is a widely-used free software license, which guarantees end users the freedom to run, study, share and modify the software. The license was originally written by Richard Stallman of the Free Software Foundation (FSF) for the GNU Project, and grants the recipients of a computer program the rights of the Free Software Definition. The GPL is a copyleft license, which means that derivative work can only be distributed under the same license terms. This is in distinction to permissive free software licenses, of which the BSD licenses and the MIT License are widely-used examples. GPL was the first copyleft license for general use.

See also

Related Research Articles

Free software software licensed to preserve user freedoms

Free software or libre software is computer software distributed under terms that allow users to run the software for any purpose as well as to study, change, and distribute it and any adapted versions. Free software is a matter of liberty, not price: users—individually or in cooperation with computer programmers—are free to do what they want with their copies of a free software regardless of how much is paid to obtain the program. Computer programs are deemed free insofar as they give users ultimate control over the first, thereby allowing them to control what their devices are programmed to do.

MIT License any of several permissive free software licenses originating at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology

The MIT License is a permissive free software license originating at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). As a permissive license, it puts only very limited restriction on reuse and has, therefore, an excellent license compatibility. The MIT license permits reuse within proprietary software provided that all copies of the licensed software include a copy of the MIT License terms and the copyright notice. The MIT license is also compatible with many copyleft licenses, such as the GNU General Public License (GPL); MIT licensed software can be integrated into GPL software, but not the other way around.

Apache License any of a set of free software licenses developed by the organization

The Apache License is a permissive free software license written by the Apache Software Foundation (ASF). The Apache License, Version 2.0 requires preservation of the copyright notice and disclaimer. Like other free software licenses, the license allows the user of the software the freedom to use the software for any purpose, to distribute it, to modify it, and to distribute modified versions of the software, under the terms of the license, without concern for royalties. This makes the Apache License a FRAND-RF license. The ASF and its projects release the software they produce under the Apache License. The license is also used by many non-ASF projects.

The Open Software License (OSL) is a software license created by Lawrence Rosen. The Open Source Initiative (OSI) has certified it as an open-source license, but the Debian project judged version 1.1 to be incompatible with the DFSG. The OSL is a copyleft license, with a termination clause triggered by filing a lawsuit alleging patent infringement.

Open-source software software licensed to ensure source code usage rights

Open-source software (OSS) is a type of computer software in which source code is released under a license in which the copyright holder grants users the rights to study, change, and distribute the software to anyone and for any purpose. Open-source software may be developed in a collaborative public manner. Open-source software is a prominent example of open collaboration.

The Apple Public Source License (APSL) is the open-source and free software license under which Apple's Darwin operating system was released. A free and open-source software license was voluntarily adopted to further involve the community from which much of Darwin originated.

The Mozilla Public License (MPL) is a free and open source software license developed and maintained by the Mozilla Foundation. It is a weak copyleft license, characterized as a middle ground between permissive free software licenses and the GNU General Public License (GPL), that seeks to balance the concerns of proprietary and open source developers.

Apache Harmony is a retired open source, free Java implementation, developed by the Apache Software Foundation. It was announced in early May 2005 and on October 25, 2006, the Board of Directors voted to make Apache Harmony a top-level project. The Harmony project achieved 99% completeness for J2SE 5.0, and 97% for Java SE 6. The Android operating system has historically been a major user of Harmony, although since Android Nougat it increasingly relies on OpenJDK libraries.

Free/open-source software – the source availability model used by free and open-source software (FOSS) – and closed source are two approaches to the distribution of software.

A permissive software license, sometimes also called BSD-like or BSD-style license, is a free-software license with minimal requirements about how the software can be redistributed. Examples include the MIT License, BSD licenses, Apple Public Source License and the Apache license. As of 2016, the most popular free-software license is the permissive MIT license.

This is a comparison of published free software licenses and open-source licenses. The comparison only covers software licenses with a linked article for details, approved by at least one expert group at the FSF, the OSI, the Debian project or the Fedora project. For a list of licenses not specifically intended for software, see List of free content licenses.

The PHP License is the software license under which the PHP scripting language is released. The PHP License is designed to encourage widespread adoption of the source code. Redistribution is permitted in source or binary form with or without modifications, with some caveats.

The Ruby License is a Free and Open Source license applied to the Ruby programming language and also available to be used in other projects. It is approved by the Free Software Foundation although it has not been approved Open Source by the Open Source Initiative.

License compatibility is a legal framework that allows for pieces of software with different software licenses to be distributed together. The need for such a framework arises because the different licenses can contain contradictory requirements, rendering it impossible to legally combine source code from separately-licensed software in order to create and publish a new program.

The following outline is provided as an overview of and topical guide to free software and the free software movement:

Free software license license allowing software modification and redistribution

A free-software license is a notice that grants the recipient of a piece of software extensive rights to modify and redistribute that software. These actions are usually prohibited by copyright law, but the rights-holder of a piece of software can remove these restrictions by accompanying the software with a software license which grants the recipient these rights. Software using such a license is free software as conferred by the copyright holder. Free-software licenses are applied to software in source code and also binary object-code form, as the copyright law recognizes both forms.

BSD licenses are a family of permissive free software licenses, imposing minimal restrictions on the use and distribution of covered software. This is in contrast to copyleft licenses, which have share-alike requirements. The original BSD license was used for its namesake, the Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD), a Unix-like operating system. The original version has since been revised, and its descendants are referred to as modified BSD licenses.

The Shared Source Initiative (SSI) is a source-available software licensing scheme launched by Microsoft in May 2001. The program includes a spectrum of technologies and licenses, and most of its source code offerings are available for download after eligibility criteria are met.

Software categories are groups of software. They allow software to be understood in terms of those categories instead of the particularities of each package. Different classification schemes consider different aspects of software.

References

  1. ↑ "License information". Debian . Retrieved February 21, 2010.
  2. 1 2 3 "Licenses". The Code Project. July 1, 2007. Retrieved February 21, 2010.
  3. ↑ "Licenses by Name". Open Source Initiative . Retrieved February 21, 2010.
  4. ↑ "The Code Project Open License (CPOL) 1.02". The Code Project. April 15, 2008. Retrieved February 21, 2010.
  5. ↑ "Archived Discussions on Not Approved Licenses". Open Source Initiative. December 19, 2013. Retrieved April 25, 2014. CPOL 1.02
  6. ↑ Free Software Foundation Licensing and Compliance Lab. "Various Licenses and Comments about Them". gnu.org. Free Software Foundation . Retrieved March 2, 2016.
  7. ↑ "Which licenses may NOT be included within Apache products?". ASF Legal Previously Asked Questions. Apache Software Foundation. Retrieved February 18, 2015.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.