[To all script writers] What Open Source License should I use?

[Xentrk]

I have been revising my scripts that I use for Selective Routing on Asuswrt-Merlin and plan to post them on GitHub. I have been reading up on Open Source licenses. It seems the best choices come down to MIT vs GPL 2 vs GPL 3. I have posted snips of my code over time as the scripts have evolved. @Martineau was instrumental in helping me understand how Selective Routing works. @john9527, @RMerlin, @thelonelycoder and @Adamm have all offered input and suggestions or answered questions I had about the inner workings of the AsusWRT-Merlin and John's Fork. @Martineau provided his useful entware check function which I incorporated into the code. I greatly appreciated the collaboration. It has made the scripts much better and I have also learned in the process.

I want to continue the collaboration and provide the ability for others to offer suggestions for improvement or make changes. So with that information, what license do you recommend? There are many pages on the net discussing the pros and cons. Following is one summary from https://exygy.com/which-license-should-i-use-mit-vs-apache-vs-gpl/ for a comparison of the differences.

Another way of looking at it is that you’re picking a license based on what you are afraid of. All of these licenses assume you’re afraid of being sued. The MIT license is if you’re afraid no one will use your code; you’re making the licensing as short and non-intimidating as possible. The Apache License you are somewhat afraid of no one using your code, but you are also afraid of legal ambiguity and patent trolls. With the GPL licenses, you are afraid of someone else profiting from your work (and ambiguity, and patent trolls). This is a radical simplification, but if nothing else it can be a helpful framework in discussing with your attorney what license makes sense for your software.

Thanks you for your input.

 

[Twiglets]

On the basis of your summary, I would go with GPL as it covers more bases.
Also someone on this forum recently changed their license from GPL v3 --> GPL v2 (it was mentioned in passing)....... just cannot remember who and it was not explained why !!!
I would look more closely at the differences between GPLv2 & GPLv3.

 

[sfx2000]

I'm not a lawyer, I'm an engineer, dammit...

For scripts - one can license it whatever - BSD/MIT/Apache/GPL*/LGPL...

For actual code - if you link to a GPL* library, you're stuck with it... same goes with code that is already GPL*

In any event, copyright does apply in most countries - @copyright Some Guy <some.guy@example.org> -- copyright is enforceable there.

It's not an easy answer - if in doubt, touch base with a lawyer that understands SW licensing.

 

[Xentrk]

On the basis of your summary, I would go with GPL as it covers more bases.
Also someone on this forum recently changed their license from GPL v3 --> GPL v2 (it was mentioned in passing)....... just cannot remember who and it was not explained why !!!
I would look more closely at the differences between GPLv2 & GPLv3.

I looked at what other script writers on the forum use as OpenSource license and none of them had specified one, except for @thelonelycoder, who specified GPLv2 for the Asuswrt-Merlin Terminal Menu (amtm). I wondered why GPLv2 was chosen over GPLv3 and perhaps he can chime in as to why. There is the WTFPL license option. But as of May 2016, the WTFPL was used by less than one percent of open-source software projects. MIT license is the most popular.

 

[kfp]

IANAL, but a lot of OSS projects that wish to remain open/free/libre choose GPL2 because

In contrast to the GPLv2, the GPLv3 clearly states that there is no requirement to disclose the source code in an ASP use of GPL programs as long as a copy of the software is not sent to the client. If the copyleft effect is to be extended to ASP use, the Affero General Public License, Version 3 (AGPL) must be applied that only differs from the GPLv3 in this regard.

 

[sfx2000]

I looked at what other script writers on the forum use as OpenSource license and none of them had specified one, except for @thelonelycoder, who specified GPLv2 for the Asuswrt-Merlin Terminal Menu (amtm). I wondered why GPLv2 was chosen over GPLv3 and perhaps he can chime in as to why. There is the WTFPL license option. But as of May 2016, the WTFPL was used by less than one percent of open-source software projects. MIT license is the most popular.

Again - depends on what you're doing - and the code that is touched...

GPL can be a landmine - and can get one into trouble with upstream - a good example is pulling BSD/MIT code, and relicensing under GPL - that doesn't work, and upstream folks can get plenty angry about that. That includes shared libs that code might touch.

I'm not a lawyer, but I have a good one on hand...

My hint before was - talk to a lawyer that is familiar with open source licensing if you are not certain.

 

[bigeyes0x0]

I don't put a license on my code, people can do whatever they want with it. My code is pretty much my own now anyway. IMO don't worry too much about it, we're coder no lawyer.