Section 8.6. Corporate Licenses


8.6. Corporate Licenses

The embrace of open source software by such IT companies as IBM, Sun, Apple, Intel, and many others has led to a third generation of licenses issued by corporations rather than individuals or not-for-profit foundations. While the terms of each license vary and typically concern specific projects and source code bases, they have become the second most popular model, after the GPL, for the creation of new licenses, and hence are worthy of study by any organization considering a similar path.

8.6.1. The Netscape Public License (NPL) and Mozilla Public License (MPL)

In 1998, Netscape released the source code for its pioneering Navigator web browser under an open source license. By this time, Navigator had lost significant market share to Microsoft's Internet Explorer in the "Browser Wars," and the decision was widely seen as a last-ditch effort by Netscape to recruit the army of programmers needed to keep pace with Microsoft. Netscape kept the Navigator name for its own commercial browser and released the source code under the name Mozilla, which had until then been an internal reference to the browser. Today, the Mozilla effort is run as a not-for-profit foundation (publishing popular programs such as the Firefox web browser and the Thunderbird email client), and its license, which has undergone several iterations, has proven to be one of the most popular contemporary alternatives to the GPL.

When drafting the original Netscape Public License (NPL), Netscape's executives first considered the classic modelsGPL, BSD, and MITbut elected not to follow them due to concerns about protecting its intellectual property. The NPL granted programmers the right to use, modify, and redistribute source code freely, but it quickly came under fire by the open source community because of provisions that granted Netscape special rights. Netscape programmers would be allowed to borrow contributed code for use in commercial Netscape products, and to relicense this code under more restrictive termsincluding the right not to reveal the source code. Netscape said at the time that such terms were necessary because of the company's responsibilities to prior commercial licensees. To placate open source developers, Netscape released the Mozilla Public License (MPL), which removed these special privileges and is still in use today.

The MPL resembles the GPL in that modifications to MPL-covered source code must be made freely available to the development community. However, the MPL differs in one very important way: larger pieces of software that incorporate Mozilla code are not required to have their source code made available. Unlike the viral GPLwhich infects larger pieces of software with its license if GPL-covered code is usedthe MPL allows developers to use Mozilla code for the creation and distribution of "larger work" (in MPL terminology) that can be sold commercially and without the source code. In a qualifying software framework, MPL-protected code would run separately from proprietary code, which would interact with the open source portions through a defined API. The user can then patent these larger works.

The main advantage of the MPL, then, is that it creates an incentive for corporate and third-party developers to improve the open source code base while protecting intellectual property. The possible drawback for end users is a scenario in which competitors make substantial functional upgrades proprietary, leading to competing versions and less overall development of the code base. The MPL is not GPL compatible on its own, although the Mozilla Foundation has started an effort to relicense all Mozilla code under a triple license with the GPL and LGPL, thus granting developers the option to incorporate pieces of Mozilla code separately into GPL-covered projects.

8.6.2. The Sun Industry Standards Source License (SISSL)

Similar to the MPL, the Sun Industry Standards Source License (SISSL) is one of several open source licenses Sun has developed for specific projects. (Sun developed one such Sun license, the Sun Community Source License, to cover Java, and due to several restrictions, it is not recognized as open source at all.)

As they can under the MPL, under SISSL developers can modify and distribute source code freely or integrate the source code into larger, commercial projects without divulging the modified code. To reduce the risk of proprietary forking inherent in the MPL, SISSL adds the stipulation that developers who choose to license their larger work in a proprietary manner must declare their deviation from the source code through a public description as well as through a public reference implementation of those deviations. SISSL is not GPL compatible.

8.6.3. The Apple Public Source License (APSL)

Also similar to the MPL, the Apple Public Source License (APSL), which Apple developed for its Darwin OS initiative and since has applied to its Rendezvous networking technology and other projects, protects source code modifications while allowing its use in larger, commercial works. Users can distribute unmodified code freely, but are required to include a notice, along with the usual copyrights and disclaimers, with modified code. As with the MPL, with the APSL users can incorporate source code into larger works and then distribute it under another license. The Apple license, however, does not grant patent rights that Apple retains. Although it grants rights to use the software, it is possible for Apple one day to require a license to one of its patents. The APSL is incompatible with the GPL.

8.6.4. The IBM/Eclipse Public License (EPL)

Advocates hailed as an open source victory IBM's decision to release the source code of its Eclipse development environment. IBM created the Eclipse Public License (EPL) to spur open source programmers to contribute to the project, while protecting IBM's private consulting relationships and intellectual property. The EPL provides for a strong Copylefting of source code and a grant of patent licenses for any patents covering the software, but contains an exception for the distribution of object code.

Developers who choose to distribute only modified object code can distribute it under any license they want, commercial or otherwise, although IBM's disclaimers must still appear and the end user must receive a copy of the source code, even if the larger community does not. The client can also be restricted from distributing the source code (a no-no under the GPL). The result is that developers can use the EPL to create custom software solutions for clients without surrendering the source code to the larger community (and thus competitors). Naturally, this license is incompatible with the GPL.

8.6.5. The Lucent Public License (Plan 9)

When Lucent Technologies released its Plan 9 operating system as an open source project several years ago, many open source developers pointed to the accompanying license as an example of an overly restrictive open source license. Among their complaints: the requirement that the original contributor, Lucent, reserved the right to ask any contributor for copies of any source code and object code modifications, effectively barring the private use of modified source code. The license also reserves the right for any contributor to relicense the modifications of any other contributor, a clause that raised eyebrows among open source developers. Plan 9 is not GPL compatible.

8.6.6. Other Corporate Licenses

As more corporations weigh the pros and cons of open source projects and tailor licensing agreements to reflect their interests, the number of corporations offering open source licenses continues to climb. The ones we outlined in this chapter are perhaps the most notable, but open source licenses are also offered from the likes of Intel, Nokia, RealNetworks, and Sybase. Many companies, such as Sun, are also developing different licenses tailored to each project. As of this printing, Sun has publicly vowed to make its very proprietary Solaris operating system open source, but has yet to choose or design a license to govern its use.



Open Source for the Enterprise
Open Source for the Enterprise
ISBN: 596101198
EAN: N/A
Year: 2003
Pages: 134

flylib.com © 2008-2017.
If you may any questions please contact us: flylib@qtcs.net