The answer of DougM and AER makes a fair point.
MPLv2 and LGPLv3 with static exception are the same regarding the events that would trigger the copyleft.
However, I think we are missing another very important difference between LGPL and MPL. When the copyleft is triggered, the copyleft applies to:
for MPL: to the very exact same files of your original ...
This question is at the border line between legal matters and technical definitions.
From a technical point of view (in scope of this site):
Extracting strings from an executable, is an ordinary operations related to reading files and filtering the output. But presenting the output or storing it means technically to copy the content of the file to another ...
The thing is I'm using EF Core to connect to de database, so I'm pretty attached to SQL Server.
No, you are not.
EF Core contains a bunch of providers, including Sqlite, PostgreSQL, and MySql.
Googling for specific databases gives you more information about the ability to use them with EF Core.
A good friend of mine once kept an expensive 12-string guitar in a cardboard case locked with the flimsiest padlock imaginable. It was there, he quipped, "to keep the honest people out."
For more than twenty-four years – believe it or not I still sell a copy now and then – I sold an internationally-successful software system (at >$150(USD) a pop ...) which ...
It was already mentioned in the comments, but to make it more visible, repeating the section from the Apache Software Foundation FAQ here (it might have been added later on).
DO I HAVE TO HAVE A COPY OF THE LICENSE IN EACH SOURCE FILE?
Only one full copy of the license is needed per distribution. See the policy.
The license itself gives you your answer.
Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
So yes, you must include the license text in your docs, or put it in the about box, or similar.
To be fair, techincal solutions are often the first call for this kind of thing.
Lawyers are rarely needed because anyone worth sueing wont be interested in using pirate software.
But they might need a push in the riggt direction.
This is why you often see "enterprise" versions of open source software. They have a few extra features that are super useful ...
The usual way is to show that you are the author of the source code.
Unfortunately, if all you have is your source and your goodwill, another party could come with your source and claim it’s theirs and that you only change the copyright. Then, you’d have to litigate and some very expensive forensic expert could eventually prove it’s yours.
So the key for ...
You either are the owner, or you’re not. It only matters if someone else claims to be the owner and complains. Like if I complained to Apple or Google that the app is really mine, then I and you would have both to prove ownership - obviously only one of us can prove it.
If it went to court, it would be best if you had not only the source code, but also for ...
There are several ways an app developer can prove ownership.
App includes link to web site, web site has name and/or photo of the developer.
Developer can produce portions of the source code. (Trivial for open source, much more difficult otherwise)
Developer can push requested changes to the app. (Again, very unlikely unless it's a small app)
Because if you try to roll your own licence management system, you will get it wrong. Users will work out how to bypass your system and cracked copies of your software will be all over the internet.
It's better to use a well-tested third-party solution, written by people with more experience in software licence enforcement.
It's not decompilation nor disassembly, maybe borders on reverse-engineering but who am I to interpret lawyer-speak?
Your argument that strings is harmless is probably invalid as strings does not necessarily limit itself to non-executable portions of the binary, this is a configuration option which can be overridden using command line options.
Anyway, since ...
Shared Event Log
Have the two programs share an event log. Each of them writes login and logout records.
These can be counted to determine current login population.
The two programs have to write a still alive message periodically (either per logged in user, or per application, or both).
While counting a login is auto logged out if the login/application keep ...
Licensing is difficult, which is one of the reasons there are third party products to enforce licensing for you. And in the context of this question we are simply talking about license enforcement. You do have to define what you mean by "airtight", and whether you support licensing enforcement on private networks.
By running a Python based application, ...
Code signing is the only technically guaranteed way to proof your ownership for an app. When you publish an app in Appstore or PlayStore, your app needs to be signed with a developers signing certificate with your private key, name of the company and other related information. All the members who have that private key with them can claim as the owner of the ...
The task of ensuring that your software is compliant with open source licenses is not unrealistic, nor is ensuring that your vendors also comply with appropriate open source licenses.
The first layer of defense would be a software composition analysis tool. There are several options - Black Duck, FOSSA, and WhiteSource are three examples of what is ...
No, the licenses are not compatible as already outlined in the replies and one of the main differences is that the Apache License grants the patent rights together with the code unlike CC licenses.
A brief comparison of the license features is listed in wiki.
Here is a nice and brief overview of the Apache License 2.0 and CC-BY-4.0.