{"id":"RPL-1.5","title":"Reciprocal Public License 1.5","reviewed_on":"2026-09-15","reviewer":"Giray Havur","text_source":"https://opensource.org/license/RPL-1.5","text_retrieved":true,"verdict":"created","summary":"Models the Reciprocal Public License, whose point is that deployment, not only distribution, triggers the duty to publish source. The record follows OSL-3.0 and GPL-2.0-only for whole-work reciprocity and quotes the Deploy and Serve definitions, because the library has no term for a network-use trigger. A reader should treat the quoted definitions as the operative part of this licence.","findings":[{"rubric":1,"severity":"info","field":"spdx:licenseId","description":"File name, license id, SPDX id and IRI agree. dct:publisher is 'Technical Pursuit Inc.', named in the copyright line of the text.","action":"none"},{"rubric":2,"severity":"info","field":"odrl:target","description":"dcmitype:Software only, following OSL-3.0 and MozillaPublicLicenseVersion20.","action":"none"},{"rubric":3,"severity":"major","field":"odrl:permission","description":"Section 3.1 grants the right to 'Use, reproduce, modify, display, perform, sublicense and distribute Licensed Software and Your Extensions in both Source Code form or as an executable program' and 3.3 grants a patent licence. The record carries reproduce, distribute, modify, derive, display, present, derivative works, modified works, commercial use and dalicc:patentGrant. odrl:grantUse is deliberately not written although the text says 'sublicense': the composer treats a share-alike duty and a grant-use permission as a direct conflict, and the share-alike duty is the statement that carries the compatibility answer.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":3,"severity":"minor","field":"dalicc:chargeDistributionFee","description":"No distribution-fee permission. Section 6.1 caps what may be charged: 'You may not charge a fee for any copy of the Source Code distributed under this Section in excess of Your actual cost of duplication and distribution of said copy.' The clause is quoted instead.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":4,"severity":"major","field":"odrl:prohibition","description":"dalicc:promote for section 5.0 ('No right is granted to the trademarks of Licensor or any Contributor even if such marks are included in the Licensed Software'), dalicc:addLimitation for the last sentence of section 6.0, dalicc:patentRetaliationTermination for section 12.2 and dalicc:ChangeLicense for the reciprocity of section 6.0.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":5,"severity":"major","field":"odrl:duty","description":"cc:ShareAlike is license-wide: 'any Modifications, Derivative Works, or Required Components (collectively Extensions) that You create or to which You contribute are governed by the terms of this License'. cc:SourceCode, cc:Attribution, cc:Notice and dalicc:includeNoticeFile (section 6.3, the human-readable file that must accompany a distribution) hang off distribute, modify and derive; dalicc:modificationNotice and dalicc:rename ('Any Extensions You make and Deploy must have a distinct title') are added to modify and derive.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":6,"severity":"minor","field":"dalicc:WarrantyOrLiabilityAcceptance","description":"Sections 8.0 and 9.0 are quoted verbatim into dalicc:WarrantyDisclaimer and dalicc:LiabilityLimitation and section 6.5 into dalicc:WarrantyOrLiabilityAcceptance, each with its section number stripped and nothing else changed.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":8,"severity":"gap","field":"dalicc:additionalClauses","description":"The licence is triggered by deployment or by serving the work over a network, not only by distribution. The vocabulary has no term for that trigger, so the definition is quoted in dalicc:additionalClauses and the source-code duty is attached to distribute, modify and derive. Proposed term: dalicc:networkUseTrigger. Text: '\"Deploy\" means to use, Serve, sublicense or distribute Licensed Software other than for Your internal Research and/or Personal Use' and '\"Serve\" means to deliver Licensed Software and/or Your Extensions by means of a computer network to one or more computers for purposes of execution'.","action":"none"},{"rubric":8,"severity":"gap","field":"dalicc:additionalClauses","description":"The source-code duty carries a deadline and a minimum availability period. cc:SourceCode cannot hold a period, so the clause is quoted in dalicc:additionalClauses. Proposed term: dalicc:sourcePublicationPeriod as a literal qualifier on a cc:SourceCode duty. Text: section 6.1, which sets a one-month publication deadline and a twelve-month minimum availability period.","action":"none"},{"rubric":7,"severity":"gap","field":"cc:jurisdiction","description":"The grant itself is worldwide, so cc:jurisdiction stays dalicc:worldwide; only the governing law is national. The vocabulary has no property for a governing law that is separate from the territory of the grant, so the clause is quoted in dalicc:additionalClauses. Proposed term: dalicc:governingLaw. Text: 'This License shall be governed by Colorado law provisions (except to the extent applicable law, if any, provides otherwise), excluding its conflict-of-law provisions.' (section 13.8)","action":"none"},{"rubric":8,"severity":"gap","field":"dalicc:additionalClauses","description":"Automatic termination on breach has no property that a record can carry: dalicc:terminationOnBreach is a policy quality with no predicate. The clause is quoted in dalicc:additionalClauses. Proposed term: dalicc:terminatesOnBreach as a boolean property on odrl:Set, with the cure period as a literal. Text: 'This License and the rights granted hereunder will terminate automatically if You fail to comply with the terms herein and fail to cure such breach within thirty (30) days of becoming aware of the breach.' (section 12.1)","action":"none"},{"rubric":8,"severity":"gap","field":"dalicc:additionalClauses","description":"Section 13.7 puts the licensee on notice of United States export control. There is no term for an export-control notice; the clause is quoted. Proposed term: dalicc:exportControlNotice.","action":"none"},{"rubric":9,"severity":"info","field":"record","description":"The consistency check of app.services.composer, run with the 39 axioms of licensedata/dependencygraph/dg_default.ttl, returned no conflicts.","action":"none"},{"rubric":5,"severity":"minor","field":"odrl:duty","description":"dalicc:addStatement is added to distribute, modify and derive, which RPL-1.1 does not carry, for the two prescribed notices of version 1.5: 'You must duplicate any notice contained in EXHIBIT A (the \"License Notice\") in each file of the Source Code of any copy You distribute' and the User-Visible Attribution Notice of Exhibit B.","action":"applied"},{"rubric":10,"severity":"info","field":"record","description":"Against RPL-1.1 the record adds dalicc:addStatement and quotes sections 6.4(c) and 6.4(d). Everything else, the reciprocity, the source duty, the patent grant, the retaliation and the clause texts, is the same in both versions.","action":"none"}],"family":"Reciprocal and source-available","port_of":null,"variant_kind":"version","notes":"Modelled from the SPDX plain text. Section 7.1 permits a modified licence text under a different name, which is a rule about the licence document and not about the licensed work; it is not modelled."}