The document discusses common myths about open source software (OSS) and explains the four freedoms associated with it, including the ability to run, modify, and redistribute software. It details various open source licenses, distinguishing between permissive and restrictive types, and highlights popular licenses like MIT and GPL, emphasizing their terms and implications. Additionally, it addresses the concept of 'viral' effects in software licensing and legal considerations for using OSS in different environments.

1. Open source licensing
Martin von Haller Grønbæk
Saturday 8 March 2014

2. Page 2
Common myths about open source
"You cannot use open source software in a proprietary
environment [or you will die]"
"Open source licences
aren't enforceable
anyway, so we don't
need to worry"
"Big companies
don't use open
source software –
it's just for start-ups
and hobbyists"
"All open source
developments have to
be made public"
"We don't use
open source
software"

3. Page 3
OSS – the 4 freedoms
1. The freedom to run the program for any purpose.
2. The freedom to study how the program works and change
it so it does your computing as you wish.
3. The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your
neighbour.
4. The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions
to others.

4. Page 4
The most popular OSS licences
Artistic Licence (Perl)
GNU LGPL 2.1
GNU LGPL 3.0
GNU GPL 3.0
Apache
Code Project Open Licence
BSD Licence
Eclipse
MIT
Licence
GNU GPL 2.0
93% of open
source projects
use one of these
10 licences
Source: //osrc.blackducksoftware.com/data/licenses/

5. Proprietary licences v. OSS licences

6. Page 6
Proprietary licences – typical provisions
Licence fee or
royalties payable
No right to modify No access to
source code
Some warranties
and other protection
Restrictions on
right to use
Restrictions on
distribution

7. Page 7
OSS licences – key concepts
● Still a licence – ownership remains with licensor!
● Scope of licence is not restricted:
● Right to use for any purpose
● No restriction on duration of licence
● No restriction on number of users etc.
● You are entitled to modify the software yourself
● Right to re-distribute the software to any person
● Generally, no warranties as to condition or performance
● Generally, no protection against IPR infringement claims
● No licence fees or royalties payable to the licensor

8. OSS licences: permissive v. restrictive

9. Page 9
Permissive licences – some key aspects
But not simply
public domain!
Ability to combine with
proprietary software
Modifications can
remain proprietary
Distribute object
code version only
Minimal restrictions
on use
Distribute under
other licence terms

10. Page 10
Restrictive licences – some key aspects
More complex terms
and conditions
No obligation
to re-distribute
Must re-distribute on
same licence terms
"Viral" effect on
proprietary software
No restrictions on
your own use
Source code must
be made available

11. Page 11
The OSS licence spectrum
Permissive
GPL
LGPL Mozilla
MIT
Apache
BSD
Strong copyleft Permissive licenses
Restrictive
Weaker copyleft
AGPL

12. Let's look at some examples …

13. Page 13
Permissive licences: The beer licence
<phk@FreeBSD.ORG>
wrote this file.
As long as you retain this
notice you can do whatever
you want with this stuff.
If we meet some day, and
you think this stuff is worth it,
you can buy me a beer in
return.

14. Page 14
Permissive licences: MIT licence
Permission is hereby granted, free of charge,
to any person obtaining a copy of this
software … to deal in the software without
restriction, including without limitation the
rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish,
distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of
the software
The above copyright notice and this
permission notice shall be included in all
copies or substantial portions of the software.
THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS",
WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND,
EXPRESS OR IMPLIED … IN NO EVENT
SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT
HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM,
DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY …
ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN
CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR
THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE
SOFTWARE
Grant of broad rights to
use, modify etc.
Disclaimer of liability by
authors
Obligation to include
copyright notices etc.
Note: Licence terms have been edited for these purposes

15. Page 15
Permissive licences: BSD licence
Redistribution and use in source and binary
forms, with or without modification, are permitted
provided that:
- Redistributions must retain the above copyright
notice, this list of conditions and the following
disclaimer.
- Neither the name of <ORGANIZATION> nor its
contributors may be used to endorse or promote
products derived from this software without
specific prior written permission.
THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE
COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND
CONTRIBUTORS "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS
OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES … ARE
DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE
COPYRIGHT HOLDER OR CONTRIBUTORS
BE LIABLE FOR ANY … DAMAGES …
ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF
THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE
POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
Grant of broad rights to
use etc.
Disclaimer of liability by
authors
Obligation to include
copyright notices etc.
Note: Licence terms have been edited for these purposes
Non-endorsement
obligation

16. Page 16
Permissive licences: Apache licence
Each Contributor hereby grants to You a
perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-
charge, royalty-free, irrevocable copyright
license to reproduce, prepare Derivative
Works of, publicly display, publicly perform,
sublicense, and distribute the Work and such
Derivative Works in Source or Object form.
You may … provide additional or different
license terms and conditions for use,
reproduction, or distribution of Your
modifications, or for any such Derivative
Works as a whole, provided Your use,
reproduction, and distribution of the Work
otherwise complies with the conditions stated
in this License.
Derivative Works shall not include works
that remain separable from, or merely link
(or bind by name) to the interfaces of, the
Work and Derivative Works thereof
Broad grant of rights; no
obligation to distribute
source code
Different approach to
the "viral" issue
Note: Licence terms have been edited for these purposes
Explicit that copyleft
does not apply

17. Page 17
GPL v2.0: Copyleft obligations
Activities other than copying, distribution and
modification are not covered by this License;
they are outside its scope. The act of running
the Program is not restricted
You may copy and distribute verbatim copies
of the Program's source code as you receive
it provided that you … keep intact all the
notices that refer to this License
You may modify your copy of the Program,
thus forming a work based on the Program,
and copy and distribute such modifications or
work, provided that you also meet all of these
conditions:
…
b) You must cause any work that you
distribute or publish, that in whole or in part
contains or is derived from the Program or
any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at
no charge to all third parties under the
terms of this License.
Obligation to distribute
modifications on GPL
terms
Right to modify the
software
Note: Licence terms have been edited for these purposes
No restriction on your
own use of software
Obligation to distribute
verbatim copies on GPL
terms

18. Page 18
GPL v2.0: Provision of source code
You may copy and distribute the Program (or
a work based on it) in object code or
executable form under the terms of provided
that you also do one of the following:
a) accompany it with the complete
corresponding machine-readable source
code which must be distributed under the
terms of [Sections 1 and 2 above] on a
medium customarily used for software
interchange; or
b) accompany it with a written offer … to give
any third party, for a charge no more than
your cost of performing source distribution, a
complete machine-readable copy of the
corresponding source code, to be distributed
under the terms of [Sections 1 and 2 above]
on a medium customarily used for software
interchange
Applicable to original
software and all
modifications
Written offer to provide
source code separately
(at minimal cost)
Provision of a copy of
the source code
Note: Licence terms have been edited for these purposes

19. Page 19
GPL v2.0: the "viral" effect
"in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof"
We believe that a proper criterion depends both on the mechanism of communication (exec,
pipes, rpc, function calls within a shared address space, etc.) and the semantics of the
communication (what kinds of information are interchanged).
If the modules are included in the same executable file, they are definitely combined in one
program.
If modules are designed to run linked together in a shared address space, that almost surely
means combining them into one program.
By contrast, pipes, sockets and command-line arguments are communication mechanisms
normally used between two separate programs. So when they are used for communication, the
modules normally are separate programs.
But if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex internal
data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two parts as combined into a larger
program.
The above obligations apply to software that:
What is the scope of this?

20. Page 20
GPL and the "SaaS loophole"
To “convey” a work means any
kind of propagation that
enables other parties to make
or receive copies.
Mere interaction with a user
through a computer
network, with no transfer of
a copy, is not conveying.
A company is running a
modified version of a
GPL'ed program on a web
site. Does the GPL say they
must release their modified
sources?
The GPL permits anyone to
make a modified version and
use it without ever distributing
it to others. What this company
is doing is a special case of
that. Therefore, the company
does not have to release the
modified sources.
Does the provision of software on a SaaS basis trigger
the GPL obligations?
GPL v2.0 GPL v3.0 Affero GPL v3.0
Notwithstanding any other
provision of this License, if you
modify the Program, your
modified version must
prominently offer all users
interacting with it remotely
through a computer network
… an opportunity to receive the
Corresponding Source of your
version.
"Distribution" is not defined in
GPL v2.0.

21. Page 21
Open source projects using Apache
"Over the course of the last two years the feedback from
our users and partners was that while the GPL was a fine
license … it did throw up some roadblocks to their
participation and use"
- CloudStack blog, April 2012

22. Page 22
Big Data and Open Source

23. Thank you
Bird & Bird LLP is a limited liability partnership, registered in England and Wales with registered number 0C340318 and is authorised and regulated by the
Solicitors Regulation Authority. Its registered office and principal place of business is at 15 Fetter Lane, London EC4A 1JP. Bird & Bird is an international legal
practice comprising Bird & Bird LLP and its affiliated and associated businesses and has offices in the locations listed on our web site: twobirds.com. The word
“partner” is used to refer to a member of Bird & Bird LLP or an employee or consultant, or to a partner, member, director, employee or consultant in any of its
affiliated and associated businesses, who is a lawyer with equivalent standing and qualifications. A list of members of Bird & Bird LLP, and of any non-members
who are designated as partners and of their respective professional qualifications, is open to inspection at the above address.
www.twobirds.com
Martin von Haller Grønbæk
Partner
Martin.vonHaller@twobirds.com
+45 39 14 16 16