Difference between revisions of "Template:Recommended Licenses"

From OWASP
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 22: Line 22:
 
   <td>No</td>
 
   <td>No</td>
 
</tr>
 
</tr>
 
+
<tr>
 +
  <td>ToolProject<br>(Non-WebBased)</td>
 +
  <td rowspan=3>Apache 2.0<br>(fewest restrictions, even allowing proprietary modifications and proprietary forks of your project, and more up-to-date than BSD license)</font></td>    <td>GPL 3.0<br>(requires that modifications to your code stay open source, thus prohibiting proprietary forks of your project)</td>
 +
  <td colspan=2 rowspan=4>Sorry, such licenses are not opensource and are not elegible to become an OWASP Sponsored Project. If this is really what you want, consider using CC-BY-ND or CC-BY-NC-ND. See [http://creativecommons.org/choose http://creativecommons.org/choose] for more information and note that they label these two license as &quot;not a Free Culture License&quot;</td>
 +
</tr>
 +
<tr>
 +
  <td>Tool Project<br/>(WebBased)</td>
 +
  <td>AGPL 3.0<<br/>(prevents GPL's SaaS loophole)</td>
 +
</tr>
 +
<tr>
 +
  <td>Library Project</td>
 +
  <td>LGPL 3.0<br>(similar to GPL but modified for use with libraries that may be called by other proprietary programs)</td>
 +
</tr>
 +
<tr>
 +
  <td>Document Project (includes E-Learning, presos, books, etc)</td>
 +
  <td>CC-BY 3.0<br>(like Apache but for documents)</td><td>CC-BY-SA 3.0<br>(like GPL but for documents. Alternately you can use GFDL, but projects like Debian and Ubuntu don't accept it)</td>
 +
</tr>
 
</table>
 
</table>
  

Revision as of 15:09, 9 December 2012

OWASP Recommended Licenses

(Trying to make a complex choice easy for our project leaders)

<td>GPL 3.0
(requires that modifications to your code stay open source, thus prohibiting proprietary forks of your project)</td>
 <td colspan=2 rowspan=4>Sorry, such licenses are not opensource and are not elegible to become an OWASP Sponsored Project. If this is really what you want, consider using CC-BY-ND or CC-BY-NC-ND. See http://creativecommons.org/choose for more information and note that they label these two license as "not a Free Culture License"</td>
<tr> <td>Tool Project
(WebBased)</td> <td>AGPL 3.0<
(prevents GPL's SaaS loophole)</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Library Project</td> <td>LGPL 3.0
(similar to GPL but modified for use with libraries that may be called by other proprietary programs)</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Document Project (includes E-Learning, presos, books, etc)</td> <td>CC-BY 3.0
(like Apache but for documents)</td><td>CC-BY-SA 3.0
(like GPL but for documents. Alternately you can use GFDL, but projects like Debian and Ubuntu don't accept it)</td> </tr> </table>

Why are you recommending these licenses? http://www.datamation.com/osrc/article.php/12068_3803101_1/Bruce-Perens-How-Many-Open-Source-Licenses-Do-You-Need.htm
Which other opensource licenses are elegible for an OWASP Project? http://opensource.org/licenses/category

  Allow commercial uses of your work?
Yes No
  Allow modifications of your work?
Yes, no restriction except attribution Yes, as long as modification are also opensource No
ToolProject
(Non-WebBased)
Apache 2.0
(fewest restrictions, even allowing proprietary modifications and proprietary forks of your project, and more up-to-date than BSD license)</font>