_1751731246795-BygAaJJK.png){kind=logo}
What open-source licenses are safe to use in commercial software?
The Two License Families That Matter
Open-source licenses fall into two broad families. Understanding which family a dependency belongs to is the single most important due-diligence step before shipping commercial software.
| License | Family | Commercial Use | Key Obligation |
|---|---|---|---|
| MIT | Permissive | ✅ Yes | Include copyright notice |
| Apache 2.0 | Permissive | ✅ Yes | Include notice + patent grant |
| BSD-2-Clause / BSD-3-Clause | Permissive | ✅ Yes | Include copyright notice |
| ISC | Permissive | ✅ Yes | Include copyright notice |
| MPL 2.0 | Weak Copyleft | ⚠️ Conditional | Modified files must stay MPL |
| LGPL v2.1 / v3 | Weak Copyleft | ⚠️ Conditional | Dynamic-link OK; static-link triggers copyleft |
| GPL v2 / v3 | Strong Copyleft | 🚫 Risky | Entire distributed work must be GPL-licensed |
| AGPL v3 | Network Copyleft | 🚫 Riskiest | Source disclosure even for SaaS (no distribution needed) |
Why Permissive Licenses Are the Safe Default
MIT and Apache 2.0 are the workhorses of the commercial open-source ecosystem — React, Node.js, TensorFlow, FastAPI, and thousands of other widely used libraries carry them. Your only obligation is to keep the copyright notice in distributed copies. You can build a proprietary product on top, sell it, and never release your own source code.
Apache 2.0 adds one valuable clause MIT lacks: an explicit patent license from contributors. For US companies worried about patent litigation, Apache 2.0 is often the safer choice over plain MIT when the stakes are high.
The Copyleft Trap to Avoid
GPL and AGPL don't prohibit commercial use — they condition it. If you distribute software that links to a GPL library, your entire codebase may need to become GPL too. AGPL goes further: even if you only run the software as a SaaS and never distribute a binary, you must offer the source to users. Both scenarios can gut the IP value of a proprietary product.
LGPL is a middle ground: dynamic linking is generally safe, but static linking or copy-pasting LGPL code into your codebase can trigger the full copyleft requirement. Talk to a US IP attorney if you're unsure how your build system links dependencies.
Practical Steps Before You Ship
- Run an automated license scanner (FOSSA, Snyk, or the free
license-checkernpm package) on every dependency — direct and transitive. - Maintain a software bill of materials (SBOM). US government contractors are increasingly required to provide one under NIST guidance.
- Flag any GPL/AGPL dependency for legal review before it merges into your main codebase.
- If a critical library is only available under GPL, explore whether a commercial dual-license exists (MySQL, Qt, and others offer this).
Where IP Ownership Fits In
License compliance is one layer of IP hygiene; ownership of the code you write is another. Studios like CodeNicely structure client engagements so the client owns 100% of the custom code — a clean boundary that makes license audits straightforward because there's no ambiguity about what is proprietary and what is third-party.
Related questions
Can I use MIT-licensed code in a closed-source SaaS product?
Yes. The MIT license permits use in closed-source, commercial, and SaaS products without restriction. Your only obligation is to include the original copyright notice somewhere in your distributed product or documentation — you are not required to release your own source code.
Does using an AGPL library in my SaaS force me to open-source my entire app?
Generally yes, if you provide the service to users over a network. The AGPL's 'network use' clause treats remote access as a form of distribution, requiring you to make the complete corresponding source code available. This is the primary reason most commercial teams treat AGPL as off-limits without a separate commercial license.
Is there a quick way to audit all the open-source licenses in my codebase?
Yes. Tools like FOSSA (commercial, widely used in enterprises), Snyk Open Source, or the open-source utility `license-checker` (Node.js) can scan your dependency tree and flag copyleft licenses automatically. Running this in CI so every pull request is checked is considered best practice.
What should I do if a library I need is only available under GPL?
First, check whether the author offers a commercial dual-license — many popular GPL projects do. If not, look for a permissively licensed alternative. As a last resort, consult a US IP attorney to determine whether your specific use case (e.g., keeping the library as a separate process communicating over a network socket) insulates your proprietary code from the GPL's copyleft requirements.
Want a direct answer for your project?
CodeNicely builds AI products, MVPs, and custom software for founders and teams worldwide. Tell us what you're building.
Talk to our team