Can I use google code prettify for commercial use. I see that Code license - Apache License 2.0. Do I need to have a copy of the Apache license?
Google Code Prettify is published under Apache License 2.0. Take a look to this FAQ. It allows you to use Apache software in packages or distributions that you create.
However you need to include a copy of license in any distribution of your software and show clear attribution to Google.
Google Code Prettify is distributed under Apache Licence 2.0.
This means that you are free to use it in a commercial application provided that you also include a copy of the Apache License with your application.
RELATED: https://stackoverflow.com/a/1007376/2081889
Related
I use Reachability Swift cocoa pod in my project, which is completely free in use and distribute. Should I separately specify the license of the cocoa pod in Xcode, or is it done with the installation of the cocoa pod?
CocoaPods provides tools to review the license of pods, but nothing further with regards to managing or complying with licenses - that's up to you.
Without being an expert:
Apache2.0 and MIT licenses are non-restrictive. Apache 2.0 is inspired by MIT, but uses more stringent legal jargon.
The GNU license specifies that you redistribute the source code. This is tricky, as the app store provides no mechanism for this. Generally avoided for iOS apps.
Some licenses require attribution in your app's documentation.
To complicate things, there are numerous versions of the Reachability pod, all seem to be inspired by each other, and have different licenses.
Don't take this as legal advice, but probably nobody is looking or cares anyway.
I would like to build SaaS application (with free and not free tiers).
And I want to use one of the editors: ckeditor or tinymce.
I don't want to pay for it.
Can I legally use it?
Can I use it if I will make my client app (which using editor) - open source (MIT license)?
P.S.
CKeditor - GPL, LGPL, MPL
Tinymce - LGPL
From the CKEditor FAQ:
CKEditor is distributed under the GPL, LGPL and MPL Open Source licenses. >this triple copyleft licensing model is flexible and allows you to choose >the license that is best suited for your needs.
The GPL grants the recipients of a computer program the rights of the free >software definition and uses copyleft to ensure the freedoms are preserved, >even when the work is changed or added to.
The LGPL places copyleft restrictions on the program governed under it but >does not apply these restrictions to other software that merely link with >the program. The main difference between the GPL and the LGPL is that the >latter allows the work to be linked with a non-(L)GPLed program, regardless >of whether it is free software or proprietary software.
The MPL allows covered source code to be mixed with other files under a >different, even proprietary license. However, code files licensed under the >MPL must remain under the MPL and be freely available in source form.
From the Tinymce FAQ:
Are there any restrictions to using TinyMCE in my commercial
application?
Yes, there are restrictions including the following. All
copyright notices must be intact as Moxiecode Systems are the
copyright owners of the source code. You cannot use the source code in
your applications without complying with the LGPL. According to the
provisions of the LGPL, any modifications or add-ons you make to the
source have to be released for the community's benefit. We recommend
that you always contribute your changes back to the TinyMCE community,
regardless of the situation. If you start to make a lot of revenue
from using TinyMCE, please remember the time and dedication that has
been put into this by other developers, respect this and give credit
to those who deserve it.
As long as you don't mess with the source code you are fine to use it for your use case (own tinymce plugins are no problem regarding this license).
If i were you i'd would go for Tinymce.
I'm about to develop an aplication for Windows Phone, and I'll use an external paid library (some of the Aspose products). As many of You know, the license file for their libraries are applied on each application execution. But, if I put that project in the Windows Store, how to secure the license file from being stolen ? Because it'll be included in that project.
To apply license file as an embedded resource, add the license file to your project and set it's "Build Action" property as "Embedded Resource", after this you can use following code to apply license:
// Create a PDF license object
Aspose.Pdf.License license = new Aspose.Pdf.License();
// Instantiate license file
license.SetLicense("Aspose.Total.lic");
// Set the value to indicate that license will be embedded in the application
license.Embedded = true;
For further details, please have a look at the "Embedding the License as a Resource" article in Aspose.Pdf documentation.
As far as use of Aspose libraries in a Windows Phone application is concerned, it has not been announced yet if Aspose libraries are fully compatible with Windows Phone platform or not. Good thing is that the verified/tested Aspose product libraries for Windows Phone platform should be available for use very soon and then you can use them without any issues.
My name is Iqbal and I am developer evangelist at Aspose.
We'd like to take an existing Linux base AMI, install our software on it, and make the modified AMI available publicly. What are the licensing implications of doing this? Our software is an open source bioinformatics tool, but does not use a GPL compatible license. I haven't been able to find any discussion of this in the Amazon documentation. They explain how to build a customized AMI from a public AMI, but no mention is made of any IP or licensing issues.
My concern is that the modified AMI would be a derived work, which I think would obligate us to license our software under a GPL compatible license.
Assuming you don't have any GPL code actually in your software, including it in the AMI would only require you to release your software under GPL if it was part of the terms specific to the AMI.
The part I am unsure about is if you would be required to supply the source code to all of the GPL software in the AMI, hopefully someone else can clarify this for you. The safest option would be to just release a package for the distribution and possibly a shell script to automatically install it and any necessary repositories.
I would like to implement/use-existing a cross platform configuration settings tool like about:config in Firefox. It would have to work on Windows and Mac. Are there any libraries or design patterns out there that people recommend?
Also, if I were to use a library, it would have to be "free as in beer" and couldn't be a GPL license. The apache license would be ok.
The Windows side uses C++/MFC and the Mac side uses Objective-C. The configuration file would have to be read on both platforms, but they don't have to share the same library.
Properties files/ini files.
Python has a library. (Config Parser)
C++ probably quite a few, but this is a top google hit. (RudeConfig)
Java has ini4j
.NET has nini