{"id":"Nokia","title":"Nokia Open Source License","reviewed_on":"2026-09-15","reviewer":"Giray Havur","text_source":"https://opensource.org/license/Nokia","text_retrieved":true,"verdict":"created","summary":"Models the Nokia Open Source License, an MPL 1.1 derivative in which Nokia takes the place of the Initial Developer. The record was produced by diffing the text against MPL-1.1 and carries the same shape. Nothing here is legal advice.","findings":[{"rubric":3,"severity":"major","field":"odrl:permission","description":"Section 2.1(a) grants a licence \"under copyrights Licensable by Nokia to use, reproduce, modify, display, perform, sublicense and distribute the Original Software (or portions thereof) with or without Modifications, and/or as part of a Larger Work\", so dalicc:sublicense is a permission, and 2.1(b) grants a patent licence, so dalicc:patentGrant is a permission.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":4,"severity":"major","field":"odrl:prohibition","description":"Section 10 states \"Nothing in this License shall grant You any rights to use any of the trademarks of Nokia or any of its Affiliates, even if any of such trademarks are included in any part of Covered Software\", so dalicc:promote is a prohibition. Section 8.2 is a patent retaliation clause and is modelled as dalicc:patentRetaliationTermination as well as quoted.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":5,"severity":"major","field":"odrl:duty","description":"The reciprocity of this licence is file level, not whole work: the Source Code form of the covered code must stay under this licence, while a Larger Work combining it with other code may be distributed as a single product. The record therefore attaches cc:ShareAlike to odrl:distribute, odrl:modify and odrl:derive rather than to the odrl:Set, which is the shape the existing CommonDevelopmentAndDistributionLicense10 record uses. cc:SourceCode, cc:Notice and cc:Attribution hang off the same three acts, and dalicc:modificationNotice off odrl:modify and odrl:derive.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":6,"severity":"major","field":"dalicc:additionalClauses","description":"Quoted verbatim: section 3.6 on distributing the executable version under another licence, the whole of section 8 and section 10, which carries both the trademark sentence and the choice of Finnish law with arbitration in Helsinki. The liability clause is unusual in capping liability at fifty US dollars where a jurisdiction allows a cap rather than an exclusion, and is quoted word for word.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":7,"severity":"minor","field":"cc:jurisdiction","description":"Section 10 states \"This License is governed by the laws of Finland excluding its conflict-of-law provisions\", while the grant in section 2.1 is world-wide. cc:jurisdiction stays dalicc:worldwide and the choice-of-law and arbitration clause is quoted in dalicc:additionalClauses, because a choice of law is not a jurisdiction port.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":8,"severity":"gap","field":"dalicc:additionalClauses","description":"Two clauses have no vocabulary term. Automatic termination on breach with a cure period is a policy quality with no property to hang it on; proposed term dalicc:terminatesOnBreach as a property over the existing dalicc:terminationOnBreach concept. The survival of validly granted end user licences after termination has no term either; proposed term dalicc:sublicenseSurvival. Both clauses are quoted in dalicc:additionalClauses.","action":"none"},{"rubric":9,"severity":"info","field":"record","description":"The consistency check of app.services.composer with the dependency graph dg_default returned an empty conflict list. cc:ShareAlike is required and dalicc:ChangeLicense is prohibited, which is the combination the check expects; asserting both cc:ShareAlike and a dalicc:ChangeLicense permission would have been reported as a direct conflict.","action":"none"},{"rubric":10,"severity":"info","field":"record","description":"Diffed against MPL-1.1 rather than read in full. The deontic model is identical to MPL-1.1; the differences are the named licensor, the Finnish choice of law, the liability cap and the trademark sentence, all of them quoted.","action":"none"}],"family":"Mozilla and CDDL","port_of":null,"variant_kind":null,"notes":"The apostrophe in the liability clause (\"A PARTY's\") is reproduced verbatim from the source text."}