Eclipse Public License 2.0

Also known as EPL v2, EPL-2.0, Eclipse Public License Version 2.0, Eclipse Public License v2, Eclipse Public License v2.0.

Commercial use: allowed
Share alike: required
Attribution: required (keep the copyright and license notices)

Compare with… Add to the compatibility check Download JSON-LD Turtle RDF/XML Text

Write this as a license text (needs an account) DALICC reads the model above and writes what it permits, requires and prohibits in plain English. Without an account, the Text download above writes the model out from the vocabulary.

Canonical URI https://dalicc.net/licenselibrary/EPL-2.0

Permissions

Change license from the text
Charge distribution fee from the text
Charge license fee from the text
Commercial use from the text
Derivative works from the text
Derive from the text
Duties
- Attribution from the text
- Modification notice from the text
- Notice from the text
- Share alike from the text
- Source code from the text
Display from the text
Distribute from the text
Duties
- Attribution from the text
- Notice from the text
- Share alike from the text
- Source code from the text
Modified works from the text
Modify from the text
Duties
- Attribution from the text
- Modification notice from the text
- Notice from the text
- Share alike from the text
- Source code from the text
Patent grant from the text
Present from the text
Reproduce from the text
Sublicense from the text

Prohibitions

This license states no prohibitions.

License-wide duties

This license states no duties that apply to the work as a whole.

What applies by default

The statements above are the library's reading of this license: each is marked with the sentence it rests on, or as a library convention where the text is not explicit. The statements below are the ones the DALICC reasoner supplies for acts the license says nothing about, from the default rules of the dependency graph it reasons with. Each one names the legal source it rests on. None of it is in the record.

Promote by default rule (adopted)

This license says nothing about Promote, and the graph applies this reading in all jurisdictions it covers: it is not permitted unless the license permits it.

A licence that says nothing about endorsement is read as not allowing it: the licence gives the licensee no right to use the licensor's name or marks in a way that states or implies that the licensor endorses the licensee or its product, while stating truthfully that a work is based on or uses the licensed work is a different act that this rule does not decide. A copyright licence grants rights in the work, and the right to use a name or a trademark is a separate right under trademark law and the protection of names, which a silent copyright licence does not pass on. Combining a licence that is silent about endorsement with one that permits it shows a conflict marked as coming from this rule.

Basis Trademark and name rights are separate from copyright: Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 article 9 lets the proprietor of an EU trade mark prevent all third parties not having his consent from using the sign in the course of trade, and Directive (EU) 2015/2436 article 10, 15 U.S.C. 1114 and 1125(a), section 12 BGB and section 43 ABGB protect marks and names in the same way. The library's evidence is Creative Commons 4.0 section 2(b)(2): Patent and trademark rights are not licensed under this Public License. A copyright licence that is silent grants no right to use the licensor's name or marks to suggest endorsement (Worldwide)

Further terms

These are the things the license says about itself beyond the acts it permits, forbids and requires: when it ends, how long there is to put a breach right, which law governs it, and so on. A term that comes from the DALICC vocabulary links to its definition.

Patent license ends if you sue: Yes. Not a ban on suing: a patent claim over the work ends the patent license, or the whole license, as the text provides.

Clauses

Warranty disclaimer

EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY SET FORTH IN THIS AGREEMENT, AND TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, THE PROGRAM IS PROVIDED ON AN “AS IS” BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF TITLE, NON-INFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Each Recipient is solely responsible for determining the appropriateness of using and distributing the Program and assumes all risks associated with its exercise of rights under this Agreement, including but not limited to the risks and costs of program errors, compliance with applicable laws, damage to or loss of data, programs or equipment, and unavailability or interruption of operations.

Limitation of liability

EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY SET FORTH IN THIS AGREEMENT, AND TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, NEITHER RECIPIENT NOR ANY CONTRIBUTORS SHALL HAVE ANY LIABILITY FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION LOST PROFITS), HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OR DISTRIBUTION OF THE PROGRAM OR THE EXERCISE OF ANY RIGHTS GRANTED HEREUNDER, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.

Additional clauses

“Secondary License” means either the GNU General Public License, Version 2.0, or any later versions of that license, including any exceptions or additional permissions as identified by the initial Contributor.

Info

Target asset types: Software
Region / jurisdiction: Worldwide
Validity: Perpetual
Source: http://opensource.org/licenses/EPL-2.0
Legal code: http://opensource.org/licenses/EPL-2.0
This description is published under: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
Publisher: Eclipse Foundation
Attribution name: Eclipse Foundation
SPDX identifier: EPL-2.0 on the SPDX license list
DALICC identifier: EPL-2.0

This record is published under CC BY 4.0. Credit it as: DALICC License Library, DALICC - Verein zur Förderung der Rechtssicherheit in der Datenbewirtschaftung, https://dalicc.net, CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). The license it describes belongs to its publisher.

Use this license

Everything below is generated from this record. Replace the example address with the address of your own work.

JSON sidecar

{
  "license-uri": "https://dalicc.net/licenselibrary/EPL-2.0",
  "license-title": "Eclipse Public License 2.0",
  "spdx-id": "EPL-2.0",
  "attribution": "Copyright (c) [year] [copyright holder]",
  "asset": null,
  "generated-by": "DALICC"
}

RDF, Turtle

@prefix cc: <http://creativecommons.org/ns#> .

<https://example.org/my-work>
    cc:license <https://dalicc.net/licenselibrary/EPL-2.0> .

RDF, JSON-LD

{
  "@context": {
    "cc": "http://creativecommons.org/ns#"
  },
  "@id": "https://example.org/my-work",
  "cc:license": {
    "@id": "https://dalicc.net/licenselibrary/EPL-2.0"
  }
}

HTML attribution

<p>This work is licensed under <a href="https://dalicc.net/licenselibrary/EPL-2.0" rel="license">Eclipse Public License 2.0</a>.</p>

This license asks for attribution, so the credit line is part of it.

Badge

Markdown

[![License: Eclipse Public License 2.0](https://dalicc.net/license-library/EPL-2.0/badge.svg)](https://dalicc.net/license-library/EPL-2.0)

HTML

<a href="https://dalicc.net/license-library/EPL-2.0"><img src="https://dalicc.net/license-library/EPL-2.0/badge.svg" alt="License: Eclipse Public License 2.0"></a>

Review

Status: Reviewed against the license text
Last checked: 2026-09-15
Reviewer: Giray Havur
Verdict: corrected during the review
Record changed since this review: yes (version 2, 2026-09-24)
Findings: 9 recorded, 6 applied to the record, 0 proposed

The record models the Eclipse Public License 2.0 with attribution, notice and modification-notice duties and a permission to distribute under a different license with a compliance duty, which matches section 3.1(b). Four things the text states plainly were missing: commercial use, the source-code duty, sublicensing, and both liability clauses. All were added.

9 findings

minor Rubric 1 spdx:licenseId applied

The record id is the SPDX list id but the field was absent.
major Rubric 3 odrl:permission applied

Section 4 is headed COMMERCIAL DISTRIBUTION and opens "Commercial distributors of software may accept certain responsibilities with respect to end users, business partners and the like", and the section 2 grant is royalty-free with no field-of-use limit. The record did not permit cc:CommercialUse, so the license read as non-commercial. Added.
major Rubric 5 odrl:duty applied

Section 3.1(a) states: "the Program must also be made available as Source Code, in accordance with section 3.2, and the Contributor must accompany the Program with a statement that the Source Code for the Program is available under this Agreement". No cc:SourceCode duty was recorded. Added to distribute, modify and derive.
major Rubric 3 odrl:permission applied

Section 2(a) grants the right to "reproduce, prepare Derivative Works of, publicly display, publicly perform, Distribute and sublicense the Contribution". Added odrl:grantUse.
minor Rubric 6 dalicc:WarrantyDisclaimer applied

Sections 5 and 6 were not recorded. Added both, quoted.
gap Rubric 8 vocabulary none

Section 2(b) grants a patent license and section 7 terminates it on patent litigation. Proposed: dalicc:patentGrant, dalicc:patentRetaliationTermination.
minor Rubric 4 odrl:prohibition none

The record still has no prohibition. Section 3.3 forbids removing or altering any copyright, patent, trademark or attribution notice, which is closer to a notice duty than to a prohibition, so nothing was added.
info Rubric 6 dalicc:additionalClauses none

The Secondary License mechanism, which is what makes this version GPL compatible, is quoted in dalicc:additionalClauses. It is prose only and therefore invisible to the compatibility checker.
major Rubric 10 record applied

Standard-license addition of 2026-09-15, decision 9: the record was corrected against its new siblings and versioned. The review's finding on family consistency and consolidation decision 4: the record carried no prohibition although section 7 says 'If Recipient institutes patent litigation against any entity ... alleging that the Program itself ... infringes such Recipient's patent(s), then such Recipient's rights granted under Section 2(b) shall terminate', it modelled no reciprocity although section 3.1 requires the Program in source form to be 'made available under this Agreement', its dalicc:additionalClauses began with the paraphrase 'Compliant License according to 1. DEFINITIONS:' instead of the quotation, and dct:publisher was 'N.N.'.

Report an issue The review record as JSON The review checks the model against the license text. It is not legal advice.

History

This license model has 2 versions. Version 2 is the one served today; every earlier version keeps its own address, so a conclusion drawn from one of them can still be checked against it.

Version 2 current2026-09-24 Giray Havur

The content review of 2026-09-15 added 2 clause texts, 1 identification detail and 2 permissions, changed 3 permissions, recorded the relation to the record this one was adapted from and recorded the review state. Later changes brought it in line with its family and its text in the verification of 2026-09-15, recorded which sentence of the text each statement rests on and named the license the record itself is published under.

View version 2 JSON-LD Turtle RDF/XML
27 changes
- added dalicc:LiabilityLimitation "EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY SET FORTH IN THIS AGREEMENT, AND TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, NEITHER RECIPIENT NOR ANY CONTRIBUTORS SHALL HAVE ANY LIABILITY FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION LOST PROFITS), HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OR DISTRIBUTION OF THE PROGRAM OR THE EXERCISE OF ANY RIGHTS GRANTED HEREUNDER, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES."
  
  Review finding Sections 5 and 6 were not recorded. Added both, quoted.
- added dalicc:WarrantyDisclaimer "EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY SET FORTH IN THIS AGREEMENT, AND TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, THE PROGRAM IS PROVIDED ON AN “AS IS” BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF TITLE, NON-INFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Each Recipient is solely responsible for determining the appropriateness of using and distributing the Program and assumes all risks associated with its exercise of rights under this Agreement, including but not limited to the risks and costs of program errors, compliance with applicable laws, damage to or loss of data, programs or equipment, and unavailability or interruption of operations."
  
  Review finding Sections 5 and 6 were not recorded. Added both, quoted.
- added dalicc:reviewStatus dalicc:Reviewed
  
  Review state Every record records how far it has come in the editorial workflow and when it was last checked against the legal text.
- added dalicc:reviewedOn "2026-09-15"^^xsd:date
  
  Review state Every record records how far it has come in the editorial workflow and when it was last checked against the legal text.
- added dalicc:variantKind "version"
  
  Port relation The 2026-09-15 review made the relation between a jurisdiction port and the record it was adapted from explicit in the data.
- added permission cc:CommercialUse
  
  Review finding Section 4 is headed COMMERCIAL DISTRIBUTION and opens "Commercial distributors of software may accept certain responsibilities with respect to end users, business partners and the like", and the section 2 grant is royalty-free with no field-of-use limit. The record did not permit cc:CommercialUse, so the license read as non-commercial. Added.
- changed permission odrl:derive with duties [cc:Attribution, cc:Notice, cc:SourceCode, dalicc:modificationNotice]
  
  was permission odrl:derive with duties [cc:Attribution, cc:Notice, dalicc:modificationNotice]
  
  Review finding Section 3.1(a) states: "the Program must also be made available as Source Code, in accordance with section 3.2, and the Contributor must accompany the Program with a statement that the Source Code for the Program is available under this Agreement". No cc:SourceCode duty was recorded. Added to distribute, modify and derive.
- changed permission odrl:distribute with duties [cc:Attribution, cc:Notice, cc:SourceCode]
  
  was permission odrl:distribute with duties [cc:Attribution, cc:Notice]
  
  Review finding Section 3.1(a) states: "the Program must also be made available as Source Code, in accordance with section 3.2, and the Contributor must accompany the Program with a statement that the Source Code for the Program is available under this Agreement". No cc:SourceCode duty was recorded. Added to distribute, modify and derive.
- added permission odrl:grantUse
  
  Review finding Section 2(a) grants the right to "reproduce, prepare Derivative Works of, publicly display, publicly perform, Distribute and sublicense the Contribution". Added odrl:grantUse.
- changed permission odrl:modify with duties [cc:Attribution, cc:Notice, cc:SourceCode, dalicc:modificationNotice]
  
  was permission odrl:modify with duties [cc:Attribution, cc:Notice, dalicc:modificationNotice]
  
  Review finding Section 3.1(a) states: "the Program must also be made available as Source Code, in accordance with section 3.2, and the Contributor must accompany the Program with a statement that the Source Code for the Program is available under this Agreement". No cc:SourceCode duty was recorded. Added to distribute, modify and derive.
- added spdx:licenseId "EPL-2.0"
  
  Review finding The record id is the SPDX list id but the field was absent.
- changed dalicc:additionalClauses "“Secondary License” means either the GNU General Public License, Version 2.0, or any later versions of that license, including any exceptions or additional permissions as identified by the initial Contributor."
  
  was dalicc:additionalClauses "Compliant License according to 1. DEFINITIONS: “Secondary License” means either the GNU General Public License, Version 2.0, or any later versions of that license, including any exceptions or additional permissions as identified by the initial Contributor."
  
  Manual edit The review's finding on family consistency and consolidation decision 4: the record carried no prohibition although section 7 says 'If Recipient institutes patent litigation against any entity ... alleging that the Program itself ... infringes such Recipient's patent(s), then such Recipient's rights granted under Section 2(b) shall terminate', it modelled no reciprocity although section 3.1 requires the Program in source form to be 'made available under this Agreement', its dalicc:additionalClauses began with the paraphrase 'Compliant License according to 1. DEFINITIONS:' instead of the quotation, and dct:publisher was 'N.N.'.
- changed dct:publisher "Eclipse Foundation"
  
  was dct:publisher "N.N."
  
  Manual edit The review's finding on family consistency and consolidation decision 4: the record carried no prohibition although section 7 says 'If Recipient institutes patent litigation against any entity ... alleging that the Program itself ... infringes such Recipient's patent(s), then such Recipient's rights granted under Section 2(b) shall terminate', it modelled no reciprocity although section 3.1 requires the Program in source form to be 'made available under this Agreement', its dalicc:additionalClauses began with the paraphrase 'Compliant License according to 1. DEFINITIONS:' instead of the quotation, and dct:publisher was 'N.N.'.
- changed permission dalicc:ChangeLicense
  
  was permission dalicc:ChangeLicense with duties [dalicc:compliantLicense]
  
  Manual edit The review's finding on family consistency and consolidation decision 4: the record carried no prohibition although section 7 says 'If Recipient institutes patent litigation against any entity ... alleging that the Program itself ... infringes such Recipient's patent(s), then such Recipient's rights granted under Section 2(b) shall terminate', it modelled no reciprocity although section 3.1 requires the Program in source form to be 'made available under this Agreement', its dalicc:additionalClauses began with the paraphrase 'Compliant License according to 1. DEFINITIONS:' instead of the quotation, and dct:publisher was 'N.N.'.
- added permission dalicc:chargeDistributionFee
  
  Manual edit The review's finding on family consistency and consolidation decision 4: the record carried no prohibition although section 7 says 'If Recipient institutes patent litigation against any entity ... alleging that the Program itself ... infringes such Recipient's patent(s), then such Recipient's rights granted under Section 2(b) shall terminate', it modelled no reciprocity although section 3.1 requires the Program in source form to be 'made available under this Agreement', its dalicc:additionalClauses began with the paraphrase 'Compliant License according to 1. DEFINITIONS:' instead of the quotation, and dct:publisher was 'N.N.'.
- added permission dalicc:patentGrant
  
  Manual edit The review's finding on family consistency and consolidation decision 4: the record carried no prohibition although section 7 says 'If Recipient institutes patent litigation against any entity ... alleging that the Program itself ... infringes such Recipient's patent(s), then such Recipient's rights granted under Section 2(b) shall terminate', it modelled no reciprocity although section 3.1 requires the Program in source form to be 'made available under this Agreement', its dalicc:additionalClauses began with the paraphrase 'Compliant License according to 1. DEFINITIONS:' instead of the quotation, and dct:publisher was 'N.N.'.
- changed permission odrl:derive with duties [cc:Attribution, cc:Notice, cc:ShareAlike, cc:SourceCode, dalicc:modificationNotice]
  
  was permission odrl:derive with duties [cc:Attribution, cc:Notice, cc:SourceCode, dalicc:modificationNotice]
  
  Manual edit The review's finding on family consistency and consolidation decision 4: the record carried no prohibition although section 7 says 'If Recipient institutes patent litigation against any entity ... alleging that the Program itself ... infringes such Recipient's patent(s), then such Recipient's rights granted under Section 2(b) shall terminate', it modelled no reciprocity although section 3.1 requires the Program in source form to be 'made available under this Agreement', its dalicc:additionalClauses began with the paraphrase 'Compliant License according to 1. DEFINITIONS:' instead of the quotation, and dct:publisher was 'N.N.'.
- changed permission odrl:distribute with duties [cc:Attribution, cc:Notice, cc:ShareAlike, cc:SourceCode]
  
  was permission odrl:distribute with duties [cc:Attribution, cc:Notice, cc:SourceCode]
  
  Manual edit The review's finding on family consistency and consolidation decision 4: the record carried no prohibition although section 7 says 'If Recipient institutes patent litigation against any entity ... alleging that the Program itself ... infringes such Recipient's patent(s), then such Recipient's rights granted under Section 2(b) shall terminate', it modelled no reciprocity although section 3.1 requires the Program in source form to be 'made available under this Agreement', its dalicc:additionalClauses began with the paraphrase 'Compliant License according to 1. DEFINITIONS:' instead of the quotation, and dct:publisher was 'N.N.'.
- changed permission odrl:modify with duties [cc:Attribution, cc:Notice, cc:ShareAlike, cc:SourceCode, dalicc:modificationNotice]
  
  was permission odrl:modify with duties [cc:Attribution, cc:Notice, cc:SourceCode, dalicc:modificationNotice]
  
  Manual edit The review's finding on family consistency and consolidation decision 4: the record carried no prohibition although section 7 says 'If Recipient institutes patent litigation against any entity ... alleging that the Program itself ... infringes such Recipient's patent(s), then such Recipient's rights granted under Section 2(b) shall terminate', it modelled no reciprocity although section 3.1 requires the Program in source form to be 'made available under this Agreement', its dalicc:additionalClauses began with the paraphrase 'Compliant License according to 1. DEFINITIONS:' instead of the quotation, and dct:publisher was 'N.N.'.
- added prohibition dalicc:patentRetaliationTermination
  
  Manual edit The review's finding on family consistency and consolidation decision 4: the record carried no prohibition although section 7 says 'If Recipient institutes patent litigation against any entity ... alleging that the Program itself ... infringes such Recipient's patent(s), then such Recipient's rights granted under Section 2(b) shall terminate', it modelled no reciprocity although section 3.1 requires the Program in source form to be 'made available under this Agreement', its dalicc:additionalClauses began with the paraphrase 'Compliant License according to 1. DEFINITIONS:' instead of the quotation, and dct:publisher was 'N.N.'.
- added permission dalicc:chargeLicenseFee
  
  Manual edit Weak-copyleft family alignment of 2026-09-15: section 2(a) grants the right to 'reproduce, prepare Derivative Works of, publicly display, publicly perform, Distribute and sublicense the Contribution', which the family's text-modelled records (CPL-1.0, IPL-1.0) write as dalicc:sublicense; the record used the older spelling odrl:grantUse, which the dependency graph relates to it with owl:sameAs, so the family now states the act once and in the same way. Section 3.2 lets a distributor 'Distribute the Program under a license different than this Agreement', under which a fee may be charged, which is the licence-fee permission its three siblings carry.
- added permission dalicc:sublicense
  
  Manual edit Weak-copyleft family alignment of 2026-09-15: section 2(a) grants the right to 'reproduce, prepare Derivative Works of, publicly display, publicly perform, Distribute and sublicense the Contribution', which the family's text-modelled records (CPL-1.0, IPL-1.0) write as dalicc:sublicense; the record used the older spelling odrl:grantUse, which the dependency graph relates to it with owl:sameAs, so the family now states the act once and in the same way. Section 3.2 lets a distributor 'Distribute the Program under a license different than this Agreement', under which a fee may be charged, which is the licence-fee permission its three siblings carry.
- removed permission odrl:grantUse
  
  Manual edit Weak-copyleft family alignment of 2026-09-15: section 2(a) grants the right to 'reproduce, prepare Derivative Works of, publicly display, publicly perform, Distribute and sublicense the Contribution', which the family's text-modelled records (CPL-1.0, IPL-1.0) write as dalicc:sublicense; the record used the older spelling odrl:grantUse, which the dependency graph relates to it with owl:sameAs, so the family now states the act once and in the same way. Section 3.2 lets a distributor 'Distribute the Program under a license different than this Agreement', under which a fee may be charged, which is the licence-fee permission its three siblings carry.
- changed permission odrl:derive with duties [cc:Attribution, cc:Notice, cc:ShareAlike, cc:SourceCode, dalicc:modificationNotice]
  
  was permission odrl:derive with duties [cc:Attribution, cc:Notice, cc:ShareAlike, cc:SourceCode, dalicc:modificationNotice]
  
  Manual edit Its duty cc:SourceCode quotes "the Program must also be made available as Source Code, in accordance with section 3.2, and the Contributor must accompany the Program with a statement that the Source Code for the Program is available under this Agreement"
- changed permission odrl:distribute with duties [cc:Attribution, cc:Notice, cc:ShareAlike, cc:SourceCode]
  
  was permission odrl:distribute with duties [cc:Attribution, cc:Notice, cc:ShareAlike, cc:SourceCode]
  
  Manual edit Its duty cc:SourceCode quotes "the Program must also be made available as Source Code, in accordance with section 3.2, and the Contributor must accompany the Program with a statement that the Source Code for the Program is available under this Agreement"
- changed permission odrl:modify with duties [cc:Attribution, cc:Notice, cc:ShareAlike, cc:SourceCode, dalicc:modificationNotice]
  
  was permission odrl:modify with duties [cc:Attribution, cc:Notice, cc:ShareAlike, cc:SourceCode, dalicc:modificationNotice]
  
  Manual edit Its duty cc:SourceCode quotes "the Program must also be made available as Source Code, in accordance with section 3.2, and the Contributor must accompany the Program with a statement that the Source Code for the Program is available under this Agreement"
- added dct:license <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/>
  
  Manual edit Every record is published under CC BY 4.0. cc:license names the record DALICC keeps of that licence; dct:license now names it by the address Creative Commons publishes it at, so that a consumer matching the canonical IRI finds it.
Version 1

The version this model had before the content review of 2026-09-15.

View version 1 JSON-LD Turtle RDF/XML

Every change names the reason behind it: a finding of the content review, one of its library-wide decisions, the metadata that review wrote onto every record, or a hand edit. None of it is legal advice.

Nothing on this page is legal advice. What a license means is decided by its text; ask a legal advisor before you rely on it.