Versions Compared


  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.


titleWhy is GPL (and similar) unacceptable?

DuraSpace DSpace feels it is important for commercial entities and service providers to be able to customize the entire codebase and redistribute/repackage/sell it in a binary form. GPL licenses prevent this, as noted in the following FAQ questions:

In addition, the Apache Software Foundation has a good explanation of why they are also forced to avoid GPL-based (copyleft) licenses because of its one-way compatibility with Apache License 2.0:

stylepadding-left:30px; color:grey

"This licensing incompatibility applies only when some Apache project software becomes a derivative work of some GPLv3 software, because then the Apache software would have to be distributed under GPLv3. 

We avoid GPLv3 software because merely linking to it is considered by the GPLv3 authors to create a derivative work. We want to honor their license. Unless GPLv3 licensors relax this interpretation of their own license regarding linking, our licensing philosophies are fundamentally incompatible. This is an identical issue for both GPLv2 and GPLv3."

While DSpace is released under BSD licensing, the same issues exist between BSD licenses and GPL-based licenses.