This memo gives recommendations for selecting open source license for scientific material, including software, data and documents. Let us continue to make the newest computational techniques easily available to spark new applications and further development!
The modified BSD licenses (in particular FreeBSD) and MIT license set minimal restrictions on the end user, and have therefore been recommended for academic purposes, for instance at ICML/MLOSS workshop 2010 (V. Stodden and G. Bradski), and in the Quick Guide to Software Licensing for the Scientist-Programmer in PLoS CB. Also note that none of the standard licenses below excludes commercial use. Based on my experiences in developing scientific open source tools, I suggest the following preference order for selecting an open license:
There are many other open licenses but they may set restrictions that are not appropriate for academic purposes, or may have compatibility problems with other licenses. For instance, Apache2.0 is nearly identical to FreeBSD and MIT, but not always GPL2-compatible which may prevent reuse (see also this link). Many people tend to think that GPLv3 sets too extensive restrictions, including requirements on hardware (see also this and this for further discussion). ‘'’Public domain’’’ or ‘'’missing license’’’ do not imply open source and can prevent the reuse of your work since the concepts are legally ill-defined. ‘'’Non-commercial clause’’’ is sometimes assigned to license (‘‘not for commercial purposes’’); note however that none of the standard open licenses sets such restrictions- commercial use of academic research results is not restricted in general, so why should source code be different? For further info, check comparison of free software licenses.
See also the Open Data Manual
The following repositories can be used to distribute all research documents (data, code, publications, videos etc.). Github is mostly for code; Figshare and Dryad are suited for data and miscellaneous material:
You can also list your work in an appropriate repository for open source content:
Pick a standard license (see suggestions below)
Check license compatibility if your project includes external source code.
Ensure that you own sufficient copyrights for the licensing
Mention the license name in your documentation and source files, and include the full license as a text file or provide a link.
Add your personal information (i.e. name, email, affiliation) in the license.
Minimally restrictive licenses can help to promote the core scientific standards of publicity, transparency, reproducibility, and unrestricted use of research results. Motivations for open licensing include: