You are hereLicense agreements and their use in software domain

License agreements and their use in software domain


By Gnanesh Wanigaratne - Posted on 21 September 2011

A license agreement consists of the licensor granting the licensee (based on mutual understanding) via a contractual agreement, the legitimate rights concerning the utilization of intellectual property pertaining to the licensor. Nevertheless, the licensor has explicit rights to the property, as per the license agreement, which also includes benefits that are generated from it. Moreover, if a violation of the agreement occurs, the licensor has the sole right to claim the property from the licensee.

A successfully written license agreement consists of the following:

  • Conditions and terms pertaining to the license.

  • Agreement period of the license.

  • Constraints of the license agreement.

  • Operational guidelines such as acceptance, testing and training procedures.

  • Transfer rights.

  • Sub-license issuing rights.

  • Alternation and concatenation privileges with respect to other products

  • Licensor liability limitations

  • Contract termination process

  • Warranty process

  • Maintenance and support services.

  • Non disclosure of confidential information

  • License agreement indemnity pertaining to infringement

  • Apply remedies pertaining to the void of the license agreement

A software license agreements is considered as a legitimate agreement amid the software vendor and the end-user. Also known as the End User License Agreement (EULA), this type of contract could be either in written or electronic form (via the embedded software installation). By advertising the copyright notice pertaining to the software product (via its public placement), it assists the protection of the copyright of the product software. In addition, it is vital to taken into account that the software licensing agreement incorporate statements which relives the vendor's liability pertaining to the outcomes of using the software product.

Here are different types of software license agreements:

  1. Free Software License – As the name suggests, the software is provided free of charge though it consist of an end-user license (EULA). Moreover, such software rarely provides technical and help support. The users who download such software are granted to explicitly run, execute, modify, study, copy and or re-distribute the program.

  2. Shareware Software License – In contrast to Free software license, shareware software license applies to software programs which boast limited functionality for a particular period, for user evaluation. In addition it consists of an EULA which obligates the user to UN-install or purchase the software for its persistent use. Some of the shareware programs consist of having restrictions pertaining the occurrence of use, while others constitute evaluation copies which provides limited functionality until they are “unlocked”

  3. Shrink-Wrap Licenses – Documentation (including the license) along with the software program is fastened via a cellophane shrink-wrap package, which is evident for anyone to see.

  4. Click-Wrap Licenses – Though similar to Shrink-Wrap licenses, Click Wrap licenses are provided on-line prior to downloading. Hence it is vital that one examines the terms of a click-wrap license agreement in advance, before downloading.

References:

Ec-Council. n.d.. Cyberlaw:Module XVI - Licensing Agreement. n.d.

 

Written by: G.S.D.Wanigaratne - Network & Communication Administrator  - NSB

I Read this article and was very interested. What about when a vendor develops a software, in open source technology, that is sold to a company that uses personnel, familiar with this same technology, to alters the system, by adding more modules. Is this a violation of Licensing agreement.

These are the two meanings:

1. Free as in free beer
Here, "free" means free of charge.

2. Free as in free speech
Here, "free" means freedom.

For historical reasons, when you say "free software", you mostly mean the "freedom". That is, you are free to modify as you wish. This is equivalent to "open source software". Accordingly, "free software" doesn't mean you don't have to pay.

Some incorrectly use the term "free software" to mean software that is given free of charge. Here, whether you can modify or not is not communicated when you say "free". It's possible for such "free" software to have a license preventing modifications.

But when someone casually uses the term "free software", he/she may actually mean "free of charge" since not everyone knows the agreed upon meaning. May be, "free software" could have been termed "freedom software" or something similar to avoid this confusion. The origin of the confusion is the double meaning of the word "free". Since majority has selected "free software" to mean "freedom to modify", you cannot use the same term "free software" to mean "software that is free of charge".

Also we need to keep in mind that most of "free software" may actually come "free of charge", but not necessarily.

Examples of "free of charge" free software:
Linux kernel and many distributions (Ubuntu for example), Apache web server, MySQL database

Examples of "not free of charge" free software:
RedHat Enterprise Linux (Yes, the source code of RedHat Enterprise Linux is available "free of charge", you can modify and sell or distribute a derivative as "free software", but under a different name like "WhiteBox Linux" or "CentOS".)

http://www.fsf.org/about/what-is-free-software
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software

I think that it gives conditions for protecting any license agreement from mis-use by a third party. Typically any open or proprietary software consist of licensing via these clauses according to the originator's requirements. Since the extent of the conditions are not mentioned in your question, in this scenario, it is assumed that the open source software is developed by a company and sold, to the third party who utilizes people familiar with modifying the code;

In this case, I think that it is a shareware license, and the third party is liable for modifying the content of the open source software.

Even in an open sourced license, the modifier of the original software is liable due to the EULA.

All in all the originator has "all the cards" irrespective of any open or closed source.

Thanks for the assist guys.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options