In: Computer Science
What are some key differences between General Public License v2.0 and Mozilla Public License 2.0?
Dear Student,
Here, we will represent GPL as General Public License and MPL as Mozilla Public License.
Now, let us look at the differences :
Both GPL and MPL promote sharing of the changes to the GPL/MPL licensed software being used inside other software projects.
Instead of requiring the users of the modified library to host a seperate fork of the library, it can promote contributing to the original library, via the Pull Requests.
The major difference is how MPL and GPL licensed code should be linked into the project.
MPL source code files can be directly copied into a proprietary software project by static linking, while GPL licensed code must be dynamically linked (loosely linked to the possibly proprietary software project, so that end-users can turn out the licensed software library for another version of the licensed software library).
Dynamic linking and thus GPL creates extra obstacles for packaging the proprietary software product, without promoting more contributions to the open source software library than by having static linkage (and thus MPL).There exists a modified GPL which allows static linking.
Both the MPL and the GPL include the right to substitute the current version with a latter version, and there are no actual limitations as to what can go into those licenses.
Choosing between GPL and MPL is a tricky question and, as usual with software license, depends on your goal.
Both licenses are very similar but at the same time extremely different. They are designed for very different goals and philosophy.
Hope This Helps.
All The Best