IT and Law Software licensing Velislav Rusev 2816989 17/9/2023 1 1.1 B Part 1 SAP GPL Apache License Mozilla 1. Not open-source and therefore not open for modification or scrutiny Open-source, meaning it can be updated and distributed by the general public Open-source Open-source 2 Restricted Usage Any derivative work must be open-source More flexible in terms of modification and distribution Allows you to incorporate it into proprietary products 3 Paid Free Free Free Table 1: Comparison 1.2 Part 2 It is hard to say whether the Mozilla OSS license is more similar to GPL or Apache License, since it provides a middle-ground between the strong copyleft of the GPL and the permissiveness of the Apache License. It allows developers to leave modifications of their code to remain open, but not to force open-source requirements for the entirety of derived projects. 2 C If I was to be a software producer I would choose a closed-source SAP-like license, since it gives the most control over the product, its usage and its users. It also provides a revenue stream. The downside is the lack of community and therefore limited innovation. 1
