0

What are iTextSharp copyrights? can I use it (without modifying it) in my project? I need to use it a PDF generation tool,

Any advise is appreciated. thanks a lot,

mahmoud
  • 240
  • 3
  • 4
  • possible duplicate of [ITextSharp license](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8517776/itextsharp-license) – Max Feb 09 '15 at 20:23
  • @Max This other question is explicitly about modifying source – joozek Feb 09 '15 at 20:28
  • Have you looked for license in the library? On its website? AFAIK there were some serious licensing changes a couple of years ago, so make sure to look for correct version – joozek Feb 09 '15 at 20:30
  • *can I use it (without modifying it) in my project?* - you can, with or without modifying it, as long as you respect its AGPL license. Beware: this means that your projects also must be AGPL licensed. – mkl Feb 10 '15 at 05:17

1 Answers1

2

This question is more or less a duplicate of several questions that were already answered on StackOverflow, but it isn't an exact duplicate of a single question. I have bundled several of these question in the free ebook The Best iText Questions on StackOverflow. If you want the full answer, I advise you to read the legal section of this book. I'll do an attempt to give a short answer here.

I am a Mentor at the Founder Institute and I use these slides to explain copyright and copyleft. You can find the text that explains slide 3 in my answer to the question Is iText Java library free of charge or have any fees to be paid?

You explicitly say that you do not modify the iTextSharp source code, which means you have probably read the copyleft license. However, you have doubts about the interpretation of the word "modifying". Allow me to copy/past from my book:

Start quote:

Free software is licensed software. iText is free software. That doesn’t mean that iText is for free: iText has always been distributed with a copyleft license.

Some people only read the first part in the definition of "copyleft". They read about receiving "permission to reproduce, adapt or distribute" iText, but they forget about the second part: "as long as any resulting copies or adaptations are also bound by the same copyleft licensing scheme."

iText versions pre-dating iText 5 were licenses using a weak copyleft license (more specifically the MPL/LGPL). This means that you can use such a version in an application that isn’t bound by the copyleft license. Your only obligation is to distribute the changes you make to iText under the MPL, the LGPL, or the MPL/LGPL. In theory, those versions can still be used inside applications that are not free. In practice, you should no longer use those old versions for both technical as well as legal reasons (as explained in one of the previous questions).

Starting with iText 5, iText has increased software freedom, in the sense that the license was changed to a very strong (some use the word "viral") copyleft license, more specifically the AGPL. When you use iText in an application that you distribute or when you use iText in a web application that allows people to directly use iText (through a SaaS application, on a web site,...), you have to distribute all the source code that touches iText under the same license and under the same license only.

Some people argue: "We do not modify iText, hence we are not bound by the AGPL."

That assumption is incorrect. Writing a web application that uses iText is considered being a modification in the context of the AGPL and putting this application on a web server for people to access is considered being distribution.

End quote

In short: in a court room, linking your application to the iTextSharp DLL is considered being a modification, even if you do not change anything to the DLL. All modifications have to be distributed under the AGPL, hence your application has to be distributed under the AGPL. This way you contribute to the community.

If you do not want to share your source code under the AGPL, or if you want to distribute your code under a dual license to make money, you can escape from the obligations of the AGPL by purchasing a commercial license.

This way you also contribute to the open source project, as the money you pay is used to pay the salaries of about 20 people who work full-time for the iText group (and indirectly you pay for many more people such as accountants, freelancers, attorneys, etc. working for iText).

If you think this is unfair, think about how you would feel if you were not rewarded for the work you are doing. You don't want situations like what happened to the guy who wrote PGP who depends on charity, do you?

Community
  • 1
  • 1
Bruno Lowagie
  • 75,994
  • 9
  • 109
  • 165