Open Source License Generator

MIT is the most popular choice — it's simple, permissive, and lets anyone use your code with attribution. Apache 2.0 is similar but adds patent protection, making it preferred by companies. GPL-3.0 is copyleft — anyone who distributes derived works must also use GPL. BSD-3-Clause is like MIT but adds a non-endorsement clause. ISC is functionally identical to MIT, just shorter. MPL-2.0 is file-level copyleft — modified files stay MPL, but you can link with proprietary code.

Permissive licenses (MIT, Apache, BSD, ISC) allow anyone to use, modify, and redistribute your code — even in proprietary software — as long as they keep your copyright notice. Copyleft licenses (GPL, AGPL, MPL) require that derivative works also be distributed under the same license. Strong copyleft (GPL) covers the entire combined work; weak copyleft (MPL, LGPL) only covers the original files.

Without a license, your code is under exclusive copyright by default — others cannot legally use, copy, or distribute it, even if it's public. Always add a LICENSE file to make your intent clear. GitHub won't show the license badge without a recognized LICENSE file in the root of your repository.

Apache 2.0 includes an explicit patent license: contributors grant users a patent license for any patents they hold that are necessarily infringed by the contribution. If a contributor later sues you for patent infringement related to the project, your Apache license terminates. This makes Apache 2.0 safer than MIT when dealing with large corporations.

Yes. MIT, Apache 2.0, BSD, and ISC are all permissive licenses that explicitly allow commercial use. The only requirement is that you keep the original copyright notice and license text somewhere in your distribution (usually in a NOTICES file, LICENSE file, or About screen). You do NOT need to open-source your proprietary code when using MIT-licensed libraries.