In the last 28 years of publishing software, I’ve had three distinct eras of software licensing. All of my recent stuff is available under the European Union Public License 1.2, and I thought to explain why.
I just can’t find any single sentence in the license text covering SaaS.
SaaS is covered by the following fragment (emphasized by me below) which was added since version 1.1 to the last paragraph of Article 1:
‘Distribution’ or ‘Communication’: any act of selling, giving, lending, renting, distributing, communicating, transmitting, or otherwise making available, online or offline, copies of the Work or providing access to its essential functionalities at the disposal of any other natural or legal person.
regarding the compatible licenses, they say the other one wins.
If you combine the original work (licensed EUPL) with another work (licensed under weaker terms, but only applicable to one of the explicitly listed licenses), and there’s a conflict of obligations for the combined result, the terms of the lesser license prevail.
If there’s no conflict or the other license is silent, the stronger terms prevail (EUPL).
The original work always remains under the stronger terms (EUPL).
Hope this clears it up.
PS: I think maybe I understand the confusion. In the earlier comment I was talking about cross-licensing. That means making the software available under two licenses. That’s something that can only be done by the copyright holder.
What you’re describing is not cross-licensing. If someone takes EUPL software and combines it with code under one of the other listed licenses, the distribution alone of the mixed result can be done under the terms of the other license (if the obligations conflict etc. etc.)
SaaS is covered by the following fragment (emphasized by me below) which was added since version 1.1 to the last paragraph of Article 1:
If you combine the original work (licensed EUPL) with another work (licensed under weaker terms, but only applicable to one of the explicitly listed licenses), and there’s a conflict of obligations for the combined result, the terms of the lesser license prevail.
If there’s no conflict or the other license is silent, the stronger terms prevail (EUPL).
The original work always remains under the stronger terms (EUPL).
Hope this clears it up.
PS: I think maybe I understand the confusion. In the earlier comment I was talking about cross-licensing. That means making the software available under two licenses. That’s something that can only be done by the copyright holder.
What you’re describing is not cross-licensing. If someone takes EUPL software and combines it with code under one of the other listed licenses, the distribution alone of the mixed result can be done under the terms of the other license (if the obligations conflict etc. etc.)