An opinionated comparison of some of the most common open source software licenses.
This was mainly created to figure out what license would be best for my software projects. It surely isn't comprehensive, and is based on my own observations. Licenses fall into one of two buckets: either copyleft or permissive, with varying levels of complexity. It sure would be nice if there was a simple copyleft license out there.
What surprised me while looking into these was the common characteristics of the groups of people (some may say "communities") who work on software with these licenses. This isn't universal: there are great projects out there that are GPL-licensed, and don't have contributors who tear each other apart.
Pros
- Simple.
- Valued by the BSD crowd (technical users who honor the Unix tradition).
- Code quality over feelings.
Pros
- Copyleft.
Cons
- Complicated, especially when comparing the numerous versions and variants.
- Insular attitudes (everything must be GPL).
- Attracts communists with self-cannibalizing tendencies (see struggle sessions).
- Concerns about license violations occupy the maintainer's time and repel consumers.
Pros
- Simple.
Cons
- It's the default on GitHub (maybe that's why it's so popular?).
- Favored by leftists and academics.
- Note this is leftists, not liberals. Leftists infect a project with politics and deceitfully use Code of Conducts to seize power.
- Academics can be too concerned with the theoretical, rather than the practical; and tend to be conceited.
Pros
- Patent protection built-in.
Cons
- Complicated.
- Do you really need patent protection?