tags:

views:

169

answers:

5

In development software, libraries, toolkits, gui's etc, what licenses do I need to look for that will allow me to sell products created using the software?

Edit: I should've said also that I'm most interested in licenses for free development tools, however, not necessarily open source.

+1  A: 

The BSD license allows you to do this; the GPL generally does not. There are a wide variety of other "open source" licenses with various restrictions, but those two are commonly used.

The Open Source Initiative maintains a list of open source licenses.

Greg Hewgill
The GPL doesn't prevent you from selling derivative works.
Andrew Medico
And furthermore, the GPL applies only to things you're redistributing - you can use GPL'd development tools (IDEs, version control software, compilers) without affecting your product.
Andrew Medico
They require you to make your source code available though, right?
ChrisC
While it's true that the GPL doesn't *prevent* you from selling derivative works, it requires that you *also* make the source code available for at most a nominal fee. Most commercial ventures would not attempt to "sell" software with such restrictions attached, which I believe is consistent with the spirit of this question.
Greg Hewgill
Thanks Greg, that's what I thought.
ChrisC
+1  A: 

Simplified, the main licenses are:

BSD: You can use the code.

LGPL: You can use the code, and changes to the code must be released.

GPL: You must release your code.

Mind you, none of these licenses prevent you from selling your product. It's just the GPL would require you to give the source code to anybody you sold the product to.

FigBug
...and that source code must be supplied without restrictions on further redistribution.
Greg Hewgill
Yeah, GPL is out of the running! For LGPL, what does it mean that "changes to the code must be released"? If I used it in a program, that's not changing the code is it?
ChrisC
That's correct.
Andrew Medico
+1  A: 

The Apache license is also common, like BSD allows you to create closed source proprietary derivatives. Some notable users are Google (android) and of course, Apache.

Stephan van den Heuvel
+2  A: 

I certainly know of the Ms-PL (Microsoft Permissive License) but you can find a pretty good list at the CodeProject license page. The first part of the page is for uploading articles to the site but it still has a good list of licenses and their restrictions.

RCIX
Thanks, however the link took me to a thread. If I find the page, is there a guide that says which are licenses allow selling products?
ChrisC
Fixed. thought i had the right URL in the clipboard when i didn't. Oops!
RCIX
Looks great. Do you know of any license types that are not on that page?
ChrisC
I may have just run across one that isn't there: artistic licenseIs that one that should/could be there? Or is there a good reason it's not?
ChrisC
If you're talking about the Creative Commons license i don't believe that it belongs with those other licenses as it applies mrore to works of art. That's not to say that you cann't use it on code; it's just not usual to see that.
RCIX
I know of no other licenses that are primarily applicable to code but if someone else knows i would be very grateful if they point them out.
RCIX
I forgot where I saw the "Artistic License" but at the time it looked software related to me.
ChrisC
+1  A: 

I'll state what's been too obvious to state so far: non-OSS products will mostly not restrict you in terms of products developed using them. That's what you bought them for, after all.

The restrictions would be in terms of redistributing their libraries, and even then, a certain level of redistribution rights will likely be permitted.

John Saunders
+1 for noticing that the question didn't actually say "open source software"!
Greg Hewgill
"The restrictions would be in terms of redistributing their libraries, and even then, a certain level of redistribution rights will likely be permitted." This is certainly not universally true. I've seen examples where you had to to pay a lot of extra money for a licences to redistribute the libraries linked into their code. To the extent that it was too difficult / expensive to distribute the code.
Stephen C
I didn't suggest it was universally true. It's true if they want their software out there and feel it's to their benefit. In the case of Microsoft, chances are they'll permit it - you write a great .NET program, they sell the Windows license of the PC the great program runs on. Maybe not so much with other companies.
John Saunders