← Back to License Compatibility Check
It depends on how you ship, not only on what you depend on. The same library can be fine in a hosted service, a problem in a downloadable app, and impossible in an MIT-licensed library. This page is the short version; the tool checks a whole dependency tree against your situation.
| Dependency | Closed-source, distributed | Hosted SaaS | Open source (MIT/Apache) |
|---|---|---|---|
| MIT, BSD, ISC, Apache-2.0 | Fine, keep notices | Fine | Fine |
| LGPL | Fine if dynamically linked and replaceable | Fine | Review: downstream users inherit LGPL duties |
| MPL-2.0, EPL, CDDL | Fine, changes to those files stay open | Fine | Fine, those files keep their license |
| GPL | Conflict: whole work must be GPL | Usually fine, no distribution | Conflict |
| AGPL | Conflict | Review: network clause if modified | Conflict |
| SSPL, BUSL, Elastic, RSAL | Review or conflict: not open source | Review or conflict: service and competition limits | Conflict |
| No license | No right to use or ship it | Same | Same |
node cli.mjs scan --out deps.json node cli.mjs check deps.json --project proprietary-distributed
Or paste the list into the tool. For Python use pip-licenses --format=json; its output is read as-is. Run License Drift Check as well to catch a license that changes between releases.
If you distribute the app, no: GPL requires the combined work to be released under the GPL. If you only run it on your own servers, the distribution trigger is not met, and a separate program you call over a socket or a pipe is generally treated as a separate work.
Usually yes if you link dynamically and let users replace the library, ship the license text, and offer the library's source. Static linking means you must let users relink with a modified version.
Its network clause says that if you modify the software and let users interact with it over a network, you must offer them the corresponding source. Running it unmodified is generally fine.
With GPL-3.0 and GPL-2.0-or-later, yes. The FSF treats Apache-2.0 as incompatible with GPL-2.0-only because of its patent terms.