Software License Compatibility Checker
Check whether code under one licence can be used in a project under another, for commercial, SaaS, proprietary, modification and distribution scenarios. Free, no registration.
Using AGPL-3.0-licensed code in a proprietary project
Likely Incompatible
Using AGPL-3.0-licensed code in a proprietary project is likely incompatible in this scenario, as the licence terms are generally understood.
Confidence: high
Compatibility is directional: using License A code in a License B project is a different question from using License B code in a License A project. Check the reverse direction.
Commercial Use
No issueAGPL-3.0 permits commercial use. Commercial use, including selling copies, is allowed; the copyleft conditions still apply to how the code is distributed.
Modification
No issueThe scenario does not include modifying the component. Modification under AGPL-3.0: permitted.
Distribution
ConflictIf a work based on AGPL-3.0 code is distributed, the whole work must be licensed under AGPL-3.0 with its complete source available. That is generally incompatible with distributing the project under proprietary terms.
Source Disclosure
ConflictIf a work based on AGPL-3.0 code is distributed, the whole work must be licensed under AGPL-3.0 with its complete source available. That is generally incompatible with distributing the project under proprietary terms.
Attribution
ObligationsAGPL-3.0 requires the copyright and licence notices to be kept with copies you distribute.
Patent Considerations
No issueAGPL-3.0 includes an express patent licence from contributors. That patent licence terminates for anyone who initiates patent litigation alleging that the work infringes a patent.
Copyleft
ConflictIf a work based on AGPL-3.0 code is distributed, the whole work must be licensed under AGPL-3.0 with its complete source available. That is generally incompatible with distributing the project under proprietary terms.
SaaS / Network Use
No issueThe scenario does not include offering the software over a network. AGPL-3.0 has a network-use clause.
Proprietary Use
ConflictIf a work based on AGPL-3.0 code is distributed, the whole work must be licensed under AGPL-3.0 with its complete source available. That is generally incompatible with distributing the project under proprietary terms.
Why?
- If a work based on AGPL-3.0 code is distributed, the whole work must be licensed under AGPL-3.0 with its complete source available. That is generally incompatible with distributing the project under proprietary terms.
- AGPL-3.0 permits commercial use. Commercial use, including selling copies, is allowed; the copyleft conditions still apply to how the code is distributed.
- When the obligation applies, AGPL-3.0 requires making available the complete corresponding source of the whole distributed work based on it.
- AGPL-3.0 requires the copyright and licence notices to be kept with copies you distribute.
- AGPL-3.0 permits distribution subject to its copyleft conditions.
- AGPL-3.0 includes an express patent licence from contributors. That patent licence terminates for anyone who initiates patent litigation alleging that the work infringes a patent.
What do I need to do?
- Include the AGPL-3.0 copyright notice and licence text with the distributed software (source, binary documentation or an "open-source notices" screen).
- Replace the AGPL-3.0 component, obtain a commercial licence from the copyright holder if one is offered, or release the combined work under AGPL-3.0.
- Review the actual licence text and how the code is combined before distributing.
- Review the actual licence texts linked in the sources, and consider qualified legal advice for high-risk decisions.
Risks
- Distributing a proprietary product that incorporates AGPL-3.0 code can expose the distributor to copyright infringement claims.
- Initiating patent litigation over the AGPL-3.0 work ends your patent licence for it.
Authoritative Sources
Rules applied
AGPL_STRONG_COPYLEFT_DISTRIBUTION (CONFLICT), AGPL_COMMERCIAL_USE (INFO), AGPL_SOURCE_DISCLOSURE (INFO), AGPL_ATTRIBUTION (INFO), AGPL_DISTRIBUTION (INFO), AGPL_PATENT_NOTICE (INFO)
This tool provides general software licensing information and is not legal advice. License obligations may depend on how software components are combined, modified, distributed and used. For high-risk results, review the actual license text before relying on this result.
How the checker works
Results come from a deterministic rule engine, not from AI. Each supported licence is described by structured facts taken from SPDX, the Open Source Initiative, the GNU Project and the licence stewards: copyleft strength, source-disclosure scope, attribution, patent and network-use terms. Rules combine those facts with your scenario, and every rule that fires is listed with its identifier.
Compatibility is directional. Using MIT code in a GPL-3.0 project is generally fine, but using GPL-3.0 code in an MIT project means the distributed result must be licensed under GPL-3.0. License A is always the code you want to use; License B is the project it goes into.
Commercial use is not the same as proprietary use. Almost every open-source licence allows commercial use; the question that usually matters is whether you can keep your own source code closed when you distribute or host the result.
The engine is open source: @esdecode/license-checker on GitHub, including every rule and its tests.
What the results mean
- Generally Compatible
- The licence terms generally allow this use; notice obligations may still apply.
- Compatible With Conditions
- The use is generally possible if specific conditions are met, such as providing source code or allowing relinking.
- Potential Conflict
- A conflict is plausible depending on how the code is combined, distributed or licensed.
- Likely Incompatible
- The licence terms, as generally understood, do not permit this combination.
- Manual Review Required
- The terms are proprietary, custom or product-specific and must be read individually.
- Unknown
- A licence could not be identified, so no conclusion is drawn.