1

.Net Core is licensed under MIT (copy below).

If I understood it correctly, it says I'm allowed to copy and modify the software, including for sale, but that I have to include the license text in "all copies or substantial portions of the Software".

What does this exactly mean if I wanted to use (and modify) a source file from .Net Core in a closed-source project?

  1. Do I just copy the file into the project and compile it into the executable?
  2. Do I have to include the license text with the compiled end-product or just in the source code?
  3. Does it have to be a separate file?

The MIT License (MIT)

Copyright (c) .NET Foundation and Contributors

All rights reserved.

Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "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, and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:

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, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.

The source file has this written at the top:

Licensed to the .NET Foundation under one or more agreements. The .NET Foundation licenses this file to you under the MIT license. See the LICENSE file in the project root for more information.

  • 1
    I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because I think this would be better asked on Open Source.SE. – Ron Beyer Nov 22 at 15:42
  • @RonBeyer Fair enough. If it gets voted down, I'll repost there. – relatively_random Nov 22 at 15:52
  • @RonBeyer I'm not trying to be a smart aleck about it, but some of us do understand the tech side enough to answer, so I am just saying I dont think it should be closed. – Putvi Nov 22 at 17:16
  • @Putvi Even if you (or I) can answer it here, doesn't mean its the appropriate place. Just like I could answer a programming question posted here. The OSS.SE is specifically for helping people apply and use OSS licenses, it is much more likely to be answered correctly there, and more importantly, found by future people there with similar questions. – Ron Beyer Nov 22 at 18:36
  • Yeah, I get what you are saying, but a pure programming question doesn't have a legal aspect. This one may have a lot of programming relevance and only a little legal relevance, but there's still a sliver of legal issues here. – Putvi Nov 22 at 18:39
1

You should include the license statement or whatever you want to call it with the product in the same way that Firefox allows users to look at it's licenses, so users can identify what they are allowed to do with the software just like you want to.

As for the separate file part, that is up to you. They aren't telling you specifically how to use it, they just want to giving you the right to use it.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.