unit_-04_2

Open Source Systems Unit 4

Sikkim Manipal University Page No.: 54

Unit 4 The MIT, BSD, Apache Licenses

Structure:

4.1 Introduction

Objectives

4.2 The MIT (or X) License

4.3 The BSD License

4.4 The Apache License

Versions of Apache License

4.5 Summary

4.6 Terminal Questions

4.7 Answers

4.1 Introduction

By now you must be familiar with the concepts of Open Source Licensing,

Contract and Copyright Law. In this unit, you will learn about the MIT

(Massachusetts Institute of Technology) license, BSD (Berkeley Source

Distribution) license, and Apache license which are used in many open

source projects. These licenses are free software licenses.

We will discuss about MIT/X license, which is the earliest and classic type of

open source licenses and is a very liberal software license which explicitly

states the rights given to the users. We will also discuss the BSD license

which is one of the simple and moderate licenses used for computer

software. We will also learn about Apache license and its versions 1.1 and

2.0. It is similar to other licenses in some way.

After studying this unit, you will analyze that these open source licenses

give you the authority to duplicate, transform, and allocate the content. Also,

you will be able to decide easily which open source license to use, if you are

associated in development of any open source software.

Objectives:

After studying this unit, you should be able to:

define the MIT (or X) license.

describe BSD license.

define Apache license.

list the versions of Apache license.



4.2 The MIT (or X) License

Let us start with MIT (or X) license. The Massachusetts Institute of

Technology initially developed a liberal software license which is called as

the MIT license, for the release of X Window System source code. You can

also call it as ‘X License’ or ‘MIT/X License’ or ‘X Window System License’.

The MIT license is nearly similar to the BSD (Berkeley Source Distribution)

license which was developed at the University of California at Berkeley

(UCB). Now, you must be thinking that what BSD license is. We will discuss

about BSD in detail, in the next section.

Note that the only difference between the MIT license and the BSD license

is that the BSD licenses contain a clause which bounds the usage of the

copyright holder’s name in marketing or promotional events without the

permission.

When you compare it with the GNU General Public License (GPL), you will

find that both the BSD and MIT licenses are significantly more moderate or

liberal. GNU GPL is commonly the most regularly used free software

licenses.

You will notice that the MIT license is one of the licenses, which have been

approved by the Open Source Initiative (OSI).

According to the FSF (Free Software Foundation - a non-profit organization

that raises finances for work on the GNU project), the MIT license is referred

as the X11 license, because MIT has released more software under many

other licenses as well. Note that X11 is the present edition of the X Window

System, which is the actual paradigm graphical engine for Linux and other

Unix-like operating systems. It was developed at MIT.

On the contrary, the OSI refers it as the MIT License, including many other

groups. You can observe that the FSF is insisting that Linux should be

renamed as GNU/Linux, because of the large amount of GNU software

incorporated in Linux distributions. We can come to a compromise by

providing a name as the MIT X License.

Even now, there are some disagreements with reference to which type of

license helps to protect the end users' rights. The MIT license more clearly

states the rights given to users, which includes "without limitation the rights

to copy, use, merge, modify, distribute, sublicense, publish, and/or sell



copies of the software, and to allow individuals to whom the software is

delivered to do so". However, supporters of the GPL argue that its

requirements about derived software and providing source code do a better

job of protecting users.

The MIT license is used for many software packages. Such as:

Open for Business Project (provides applications and tools for business

based on Sun's J2EE standard).

X11 and XFree86 (an open source implementation of X86).

MetaKit (an efficient embedded database library with a small footprint).

Expat (an XML 1.0 parser written in C).

Note that other programmers or developers are free to alter the MIT license

to suit their own necessities because it is not copyrighted, as compared to

the GPL. Consider an example of FSF, which utilizes a license, which is one

and the same to the MIT License, except for the addition of the following

text.

Except as limited in this notice, the name(s) of the above copyright owners

shall not be used in marketing or otherwise to advertise the sale, use or

other transactions in this software without former written authorization.

If you want your code to be accessible by an enormous potential number of

developers and derivative works, and you do not mind the code being used

in proprietary programs, choose the MIT/X Window System license because

it is short, simple, and easy to understand.

Self Assessment Questions:

1. MIT license is a ___________ software license.

2. The BSD license was developed at the _______________________.

3. According to the Free Software Foundation (FSF), the MIT license is

referred as the _______ license.

4. FSF is insisting that Linux should be renamed as __________ , because

of the large amount of GNU software incorporated in Linux distributions.

Activity 1

Research on web for different types of software or applications packages

which use the MIT licenses.



4.3 The BSD License

In the previous section, you learnt about MIT license which is in some way,

similar to BSD license. In this section, we will discuss about BSD.

You can categorize the BSD license, under the range of exceptionally

simple and moderate licenses, which is used for computer software. The

BSD license was first used in the year 1980 for Berkeley Source Distribution

(BSD), which is known as BSD Unix. BSD Unix is an enhanced version of

the original UNIX operating system that was initially written in the year 1969

at Bell Labs by Ken Thompson - a computer scientist, who was notable for

his work on the UNIX operating system.Under a typical BSD license, you will

find that the users of released software, that is, you have a distinct limitation.

The limitation is that, if you redistribute the software in any form, with or

without alteration then you must include the following conditions along with

the redistribution:

The original copyright document.

A list of two simple limitations.

A repudiation of liability.

This is in contrast with the MIT license, where the name of the copyright

holder is not mentioned.

In some cases, you will find that the BSD licenses furthermore include a

clause that limits the usage of names of the projects (or the names of its

providers) for approving or marketing derivative works. The general

definition of a derivative work is “software or a product which incorporates or

is based on one or more already existing works.” This can become an

intricate issue, particularly with reference to any software. However, the

most important pointer that a software program is a derivative of another

program is that if the software comprises source code from the original

program.

Due to the minimal limitations of BSD-style licenses, software released

under such licenses can be freely altered and used in proprietary software

for which the source code is undisclosed.

BSD licenses have been a huge success. Therefore, they are now

extensively used for a variety of software. Among the many software or

products released under this type of licenses are the descendants of the



original BSD UNIX. They are OpenBSD, NetBSD, FreeBSD, and Darwin

(the foundation of the Mac OS X). Software or products under BSD license

are also frequently incorporated in Linux distributions (i.e., versions), and it

is also been included into some of the Microsoft Windows operating

systems.

BSD license’s original version enclosed a clause called as advertising

clause. This clause stated that all advertising resources or materials that

talk about features of or use of the software must exhibit the acceptance.

For example, “This software or product includes software developed by the

University of California, Berkeley and its contributors."

Let us now see the inconveniencies with the advertising clause:

One of the inconveniences arises from the reality that individuals who

made alterations to the source code regularly wanted to have their

names added to the acceptance. This could effortlessly result in large

and awkward acceptances for products with numerous contributors and

for software distributions consisting of multiple individual projects.

A second inconvenience was legal incompatibility with the conditions of

the GPL. This is because the GPL excludes the addition of limitations

further than those that it already inflicts. Thus, it was necessary to

separate out GPL and BSD licensed software within projects.

Initially, the "detestable BSD advertising clause," as it was referred to by

GPL supporters, was used only for the BSD UNIX license. That did not

cause any major inconvenience as it was only essential to comprise a single

sentence of acceptance in any announcement or advertisements.

Nevertheless, other software programmers or developers did not copy the

clause verbatim, but instead replaced the phrase "University of California"

with the name of their own organization. The change in the name also

included the name of the persons involved in it. This resulted in a creation of

slightly diverse licenses and consequently, serious inconveniences when

many such programs were assembled to form a larger work or an operating

system. For example, if a program or an operating system required fifty

slightly different acceptance sentences, each naming a different

programmer or group of programmers, such advertising alone might require

a full page. Not only would this be very monotonous while reading it, but it

could also be costly.



You must note that the revised BSD license (the BSD license without the

advertising clause) is preferred to MIT/X license because the revised BSD

contains this clause:

“Neither the name of the <ORGANIZATION> nor the names of its

contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this

software without specific prior written permission”

It is obscured that without such a clause, a receiver of the software would

have had the authority to use the licensor's name anyway; but any possible

doubt is removed with this clause. So, the revised BSD license may be

preferable (to some extent) to MIT/X for organizations concerned about

trademark control.

This is to add-on to your knowledge that, in the year 1999, after two years of

discussion, the Office of Technology Licensing at UCB deleted the foregoing

paragraph of those BSD Unix files containing the acknowledgement within

advertising materials, in its entirety."

This was obviously very practical. However, it could not eradicate the legacy

of the advertising clause. This is because as related clauses still exist in the

licenses of many software or programs that pursued the old BSD license.

Only the programmers or developers of such packages can change them.

BSD is acknowledged a very permissive license, as it permits the

uncontrolled acquiring of source code, for temporary use, for other software

projects with no provision of sharing the source code.

You can choose a BSD style license for research that is of long term or

other projects requiring a development environment that:

Has less cost (nearly zero).

Will develop over a long period of time.

Allows anyone to keep the option of advertising final results with

minimum legal issues.


5. The BSD license comes under the range of exceptionally simple and

moderate licenses. (True/False)?

6. Under a typical BSD license the users of released software will not have

a distinct limitation. (True/False)?



7. BSD license’s original version enclosed a clause called as advertising

clause. (True/False)?

8. GPL excludes the addition of limitations further than those that it already

inflicts. (True/False)?

4.4 The Apache License

In the previous sections, we discussed about MIT and BSD licenses. Now,

you must be thinking what the Apache license is. We will now move further

to learn the ‘Apache License’ which is almost same as other licenses such

as the MIT and BSD licenses.

Apache Software Foundation (ASF) has authored the Apache license which

is a free software license. When Berkeley removed their advertising clause

from the BSD license, Apache also created the Apache License v1.1 - a

slight variation on the modified BSD license.

Apache License needs protection of the disclaimer and copyright notice.

However, it is not a copy left license. Copyleft is a form of licensing which is

used to maintain copyright conditions for works such as computer software,

documents, music, and art.

You must observe that the Apache License permits the user to use the

source code for the development of proprietary software as well as free and

open source software. It gives wide permissions on usage and reallocation

of a program. These licenses help us accomplish our mission of offering

software products which are trustworthy and long-lived, through collective

open source software development. In all cases, givers keep full rights to

use their original offerings, for any other mission outside of Apache while

offering the ASF and its projects the right to allocate and build upon their

work within Apache.

All programs or software developed by the ASF, including any of its subjects

or projects is licensed as per the terms of the Apache License. At times

some of the non ASF software is licensed using the Apache License as well.

The Apache license, version 1.1, follows significantly the same model as the

BSD License in premising distribution and modification upon fulfilment with

moderately relaxed terms. Version 2.0, a top-down redrafting of the license,

was first published in the year 2004.



As you have now become familiar with the Apache license, let us now

discuss about the different versions of the Apache license.

4.4.1 Versions of Apache License

Apache license includes different versions of the license agreement as

given in the figure 4.1

Figure 4.1: Versions of Apache License

Let us now discuss these versions in detail.

Apache License 1.0.

The Apache License 1.0 is the original Apache license which applies

only to older versions of Apache packages (such as version 1.2 of the

Web server). This version needed that derived (derivative works)

products include an acknowledgement in their advertising material, in

the license’s advertising clause.

The Apache license, Version 1.1.

As compared to previous version, that is, version 1.0, this version needs

acknowledgement in their documentation. In general, the Apache

license version 1.1 is slightly extended as compared to the other

licenses (MIT and BSD licenses). However, the function and the way it

operates is much the same way as the other licenses.

The Apache license version 1.1 clauses commence the restrictions or

limitations on distribution, the copyright notice, and the first two

limitations are significantly alike to those in the BSD License.

The Apache license version 1.1 does not have the awkward promotional

or marketing clause in the reversed version of the BSD License.



However, it needs an acceptance of the owner’s or creator’s contribution

to the work being shared.

Similar to the BSD License, the Apache license version 1.1 contains a

non-acceptance provision, which guards the reputation of the creator.

Resembling the provision just conversed above; the provision prevents

the probably destructive association of the creator with derivative works

created from the original code.

Finally, the Apache license version 1.1 comprises a warranty disclaimer

provision significantly alike to those already described.

The license ends with clauses recognizing the contributors to the code

being shared or distributed. It is also important to know that these are

not, firmly speaking, parts of the license as they inflict no compulsion on

the user.

The Apache license, Version 2.0

You will now study about the Apache license, version 2.0 which was

produced in 2004, as Apache decided to escape from the BSD model a

little more completely.

This license revision was made to:

lessen the number of frequently asked questions.

give permission to the license to be reusable without transformation

by any other project.

give permission to the license to be appended by reference rather

than getting listed in every file.

make clear the license on submission of contributions.

abolish comments relevant to apache and other derived

acknowledgement notices to a location external to the license terms.

The Apache license version 2.0 is a systematic review of the original

Apache license. The Apache license version 1.1 functions similar to a BSD

or MIT license with a non-approval provision excluding the use of the name

Apache without permission. The Apache license version 2.0 is a more

complex license, which leaves out in more precise detail of the rights

granted. The Apache License v2 allows specific rights under specific

conditions. A licensee of Apache Licensed V2 software can:



duplicate, transform and allocate the covered software in source and/or

binary forms. *

apply patent rights that would usually offered to the licensor only.

Provided that:

all duplicates or copies, whether transformed or not, are supplemented

by a e licence copy.

all transformations are clearly marked as being the work of the

transformer.

all announcements of copyright, trademark and patent rights are

followed accurately in allocated copies.

the licensee does not use any trademarks associated to the licensor.

In particular, the Apache license version 2.0 varies by specifically

addressing both patent rights being granted by the license and the use of

other licenses for derivative works based on works licensed under the

Apache license version 2.0. Possibly most significantly, the Apache license

version 2.0 provides for contributions to the licensed work. These licensed

works are made with the express consideration that they will become part of

the licensed work and will be governed by the Apache license version 2.0.

Once the introductory phrases are completed the definitions including the

terms and conditions for use, reproduction, and distribution follow.

1. Definitions

License: The terms and conditions for reproduction, use, and

distribution.

Licensor: The copyright owner or entity authorized by the copyright

owner that is granting the License.

Legal entity: The union of the acting entity and all other entities that

control, are controlled by, or are under common control with that

entity.

You or Your: An individual or Legal Entity exercising permission

granted by this license.

Source form: The preferred form for making modifications, including

but not limited to software source code, documentation source, and

configuration files.



Object form: Any form resulting from mechanical transformation or

translation of a source form, including but not limited to compiled

object code, generated documentation, and conversions to other

media types.

Work: The work of authorship, whether in source or object form,

made available under the license, as indicated by a copyright notice

that is included in or attached to the work.

Derivative works: Any work, whether in source or object form that is

based on the work.

Contribution: Any work of authorship, including the original version

of the work and any alterations or additions to that work or derivative

works.

Contributor: Any individual or a licensor or a legal entity on behalf

of whom a contribution has been received.

2. Grant of Copyright license

With reference to the terms and conditions of this license, each

contributor hereby permits you a worldwide, perpetual, no-charge, non-

exclusive, royalty-free, irrevocable copyright license.

3. Grant of Patent license

With reference to the terms and conditions of this license, each

contributor hereby permits to you a worldwide, perpetual, no-charge,

non-exclusive, royalty-free, irrevocable patent license. These licenses

apply only to patent claims.

4. Redistribution

You may replicate and distribute copies of the work or derivative works

in any medium.

5. Submission of contributions

Any contribution purposely submitted for addition in the work by you to

the licensor shall be under the terms and conditions of this license,

without any additional terms or conditions.



6. Trademarks

This license does not provide permission to use the logos, trade names,

service marks, or product names of the licensor.

7. Disclaimer of Warranty

Unless agreed to in writing or required by applicable law, licensor

provides the work (with each contributor providing the contributions) on

an "as is" basis, without warranties or conditions any kind, either

expressed or implied, including, without limitation, any warranties or

conditions of title, non-infringement, merchantability, or fitness for a

particular

8. Limitation of liability

Under no legal theory and in no event, whether in tort (including

negligence), contract, or otherwise, unless required by applicable law

(such as purposeful and grossly neglectful acts) or agreed to in writing,

shall any contributor be liable to you for damages.

9. Accepting warranty or Additional liability

While redistributing the work or derivative works, you may decide to

offer, and charge a fee for, warranty, acceptance of support, insurance,

or other liability obligations and/or rights consistent with this license.

Now, we will study the implementation of the Apache license to any of your

work.

To apply the Apache license to your work, put together the following

boilerplate notice, with the fields enclosed by brackets "[ ]" replaced with

your own recognizing information. (Do not include the brackets!) The text

should be enclosed in the suitable comment syntax for the file format. It is

also recommend that a file or class name and description of purpose be

included on the same "printed page" as the copyright notice for easier

identification within third-party archives.

You must note that acceptance of the Apache license requires you not to

declare any patent rights it may claim against the ASF. Apache-licensed

code is suitable with the proprietary software and the GPL version 3.0 too.

As we discussed earlier that Apache license consists of trademark and

patent provisions, you must observe that this protect open source projects

as they profit in getting more users.




9. License refers to the terms and conditions for ___________, use, and

distribution.

10. Work refers to any work of ___________, including the original version

of the work and any alterations or additions to that work or derivative

works thereof.

11. Derivative works refers to any work, whether in source or object form

that is based on the work. (True/False)?

12. Trademarks are the license that does not provide permission to use the

logos, trade names, service marks, or product names of the licensor.

(True/False)?

Activity 2

Do a research on how the Http Components have successfully

implemented the Apache licenses.

4.5 Summary

We have studied that the earliest and classic types of open source licenses

are the MIT (or X) and BSD licenses. Most of the projects, which come

under the open source initiative, use the MIT (or X), BSD, and Apache

licenses

As we have learnt that the Massachusetts Institute of Technology initially

developed a moderate license which is called as the MIT license. The MIT

license is similar to the BSD license. A version of UNIX by name Berkeley

Source Distribution used this license first which was developed at the

University of California at Berkeley (UCB). The MIT license is used for many

software packages. Such as: open for business project, X11 and XFree86,

MetaKit, and Expat.

The MIT license is referred as the X11 license, according to the Free

Software Foundation (FSF). This is because the MIT has released more

software under many other licenses as well. X11 is the present edition of the

X Window System, which is the actual paradigm graphical engine for Linux

and other Unix-like operating systems.



We have comprehended that the BSD license which is similar to the MIT

license was also developed at the University of California at Berkeley. BSD

license’s original version enclosed a clause called as advertising clause.

The advertising clause stated that all advertising resources or materials that

talk about features of or use of the software must exhibit the acceptance.

We have understood that an Apache license is almost same as other

licenses such as the MIT and BSD licenses. Apache Software Foundation

(ASF) has authored the Apache license which is a free software license.

The Apache license, version 1.1, follows significantly the same model as the

BSD License in premising distribution and modification upon fulfilment with

moderately relaxed terms. Version 2.0, a top-down redrafting of the license,

was first published in the year 2004. The Apache license version 2.0 is a

systematic review of the original Apache license. The Apache license

version 2.0 varies by specifically addressing both patent rights being

granted by the license and the use of other licenses for derivative works

based on works licensed under the Apache license version 2.0.

Glossary

Let us have an overview of the important terms mentioned in the unit:

Detestable: An inspiring or deserving clause of BSD.

Inaptness: Not elegant or graceful in expression with the conditions of the

GPL.

Intricate: An involvement issue with reference to a derivative work.

Mac OS X: It a series of UNIX based operating system, and graphical user

interfaces, developed and marketed by Apple Inc.

Repudiation: The refusal of the liability condition when the user decides to

redistribute the software.

Rescinded: To make void the version of the BSD License.

4.6 Terminal Questions

1. Explain the MIT license.

2. Elucidate the definition of BSD license.

3. What is an Apache license?

4. Describe the any 4 definitions of Apache license version 2.0.

5. Explain the advertising clause.



4.7 Answers

Self Assessments Questions

1. Liberal

2. University of California at Berkeley

3. X11.

4. GNU/Linux

5. True

6. False

7. True

8. True

9. Reproduction

10. Authorship

11. True

12. True

Terminal Questions

1. Refer the initial paragraphs of section 4.2 The MIT (or X) License.

2. Refer the initial paragraphs of section 4.3 The BSD License.

3. Refer the initial paragraphs of section 4.4 The Apache License.

4. Refer section 4.4.1 Versions of Apache License v1.1 and v2.0.

5. Refer the middle contents of section 4.3 The BSD License.

References and Suggested Readings

Lawrence E. Rosen (2005), Open source licensing: software freedom

and intellectual property law.

Michael Lucas (2002), Absolute BSD: the ultimate guide to FreeBSD.

Nick Kew (2007), The Apache modules book: application development

with Apache.

E References

http://www.opensource.org/licenses/category.

http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php.

http://www.apache.org/licenses/.

http://producingoss.com/en/license-choosing.html.

Documents

unit_-04_2