{"id":"Apple-Sample-Code-License","title":"Apple Sample Code License","reviewed_on":"2026-09-22","reviewer":"Giray Havur","text_source":"https://scancode-licensedb.aboutcode.org/apple-sscl.LICENSE","text_retrieved":true,"verdict":"created","summary":"Four sentences that let you put the sample source code into your own program without restriction, on the condition that a changed copy is not passed on under the original designation and that the source says where it came from. It is the shortest text of this family and the only one that licenses code rather than a model, although model repositories declare it. The record follows the permissive shape: relicensing is a permission with a compliant-licence duty, and the renaming condition is a duty on the acts that trigger it.","findings":[{"rubric":1,"severity":"info","field":"dct:title","description":"File name, record identifier and IRI local name agree. There is no SPDX identifier, so no spdx:licenseId triple is written. dct:title is the name of the document the publisher distributes; the heading the text itself carries, \"Apple Sample Source Code License\", and the two model-hub tags are in dct:alternative.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":2,"severity":"major","field":"odrl:target","description":"dcmitype:Software alone. The text speaks only of \"this Apple sample source code\" and of incorporating it \"into your program(s)\", and it licenses no weights, no data and no documentation. This is the one record of the family that does not also carry dcmitype:Dataset; the asset types follow what the text licenses, not the kind of repository that declares it.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":3,"severity":"major","field":"odrl:permission","description":"The grant is \"You may incorporate this Apple sample source code into your program(s) without restriction.\" Incorporation into another program covers copying, changing and passing the result on, so the record permits odrl:reproduce, odrl:distribute, odrl:modify, odrl:derive, cc:DerivativeWorks and dalicc:ModifiedWorks, and cc:CommercialUse because the grant names no limit of purpose. dalicc:ChangeLicense is permitted and carries dalicc:compliantLicense: the text lets the code travel inside your own program under your own terms, provided the two conditions below are met.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":4,"severity":"minor","field":"odrl:prohibition","description":"The record states no prohibition. There is no trademark or endorsement clause, so dalicc:promote is absent, which is unusual in this library and is stated here for that reason. The one bar the text does carry, \"You are not permitted to redistribute this Apple sample source code as 'Apple sample source code' after having made changes\", is a condition on how a changed copy is named, so it is modelled as the dalicc:rename duty rather than as a prohibition.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":5,"severity":"major","field":"odrl:duty","description":"Two duties on each of odrl:distribute, odrl:modify and odrl:derive. dalicc:rename comes from the bar on redistributing a changed copy under the original designation. dalicc:modificationNotice and cc:Attribution come from \"If you're going to re-distribute the source, we require that you make it clear in the source that the code was descended from Apple sample source code, but that you've made changes.\" cc:Attribution hangs on odrl:distribute only, because it is redistribution that the sentence addresses.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":6,"severity":"minor","field":"dalicc:WarrantyDisclaimer","description":"dalicc:WarrantyDisclaimer carries \"This Apple sample source code has been provided \"AS IS\" and the responsibility for its operation is yours.\" There is no limitation-of- liability clause, so dalicc:LiabilityLimitation is left out rather than filled with the disclaimer. dalicc:additionalClauses carries the grant, the redistribution bar and the descended-from condition, one literal each. No long dash appears in the text.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":7,"severity":"minor","field":"cc:jurisdiction","description":"cc:jurisdiction is dalicc:worldwide and dalicc:validityType is dalicc:perpetual. The text names no territory, no governing law, no term and no termination clause, so dalicc:governingLaw and dalicc:terminatesOnBreach are left out.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":8,"severity":"gap","field":"dalicc:additionalClauses","description":"The sentence \"You are not permitted to redistribute this Apple sample source code as 'Apple sample source code' after having made changes\" bars the use of the original designation for a changed copy. dalicc:rename says the changed work must be distinguishable, which is the effect, but the text is a bar on a designation rather than a duty to choose a new title. Quoted; the proposed term is dalicc:originalDesignationBar, a rule action for a licence that reserves its own naming for the unchanged work.","action":"none"},{"rubric":9,"severity":"info","field":"record","description":"The consistency check of app.services.composer against dg_default returned an empty conflict list.","action":"none"},{"rubric":10,"severity":"info","field":"record","description":"Family: the outlier of the model family. Every other record of the family carries a use restriction, a termination clause or an acceptable-use policy; this one carries none, and it is the only record whose target is software alone. Its nearest sibling in the library is the short permissive group, whose records also permit relicensing with a compliant- licence duty.","action":"none"}],"family":"Model licences","port_of":null,"variant_kind":null,"variant_of":null,"notes":"The publisher distributes the document as a PDF, which could not be converted, so the text was taken from the plain-text copy in the ScanCode license database; cc:legalcode points there and dct:source points at the publisher's own PDF. The short form of the name is used as dct:title because that is how the publisher names the file; the heading inside the text is kept as an alternative."}