Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

4
  • I'll take a look at that license. Just one question: I don't think I can add a term to the Apache 2.0 license, should that be in the license notice? I've read that the notice is like a complement of the standard license. But I'm not sure if there I can put more restrictions than the ones in the license. Commented Dec 30, 2016 at 18:03
  • "I don't think I can add a term to the Apache 2.0 license" - why not? You can always write a license text for your software saying "this program published under Apache 2.0 license, with the following additional restrictions: ...". I agree to @StephenC in that if you need a license which holds in court, you should ask a lawyer specialised in copyright law to work out the exact wording. However, even that will give you a 100% guarantee not ending up with a self contradictory text ;-) Commented Dec 31, 2016 at 8:59
  • You cannot however add an additional restriction and continue to call it the Apache 2.0 license. Commented Dec 31, 2016 at 19:30
  • @whatisname: That is obvious, if the Op wants different license terms than Apache 2.0, it becomes a different license. Commented Dec 31, 2016 at 20:48