esdecode
Sign inJoin

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.

VS
Contextual questions (optional)

Using GPL-2.0-licensed code in a project under Apache-2.0

Likely Incompatible

Using GPL-2.0-licensed code in a project under Apache-2.0 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 issue

GPL-2.0 permits commercial use. Commercial use, including selling copies, is allowed; the copyleft conditions still apply to how the code is distributed.

Modification

No issue

The scenario does not include modifying the component. Modification under GPL-2.0: permitted.

Distribution

Conflict

A distributed work containing GPL-2.0-only code must be licensed as a whole under GPL-2.0, and the FSF and the Apache Software Foundation consider Apache-2.0 code incompatible with GPL-2.0. The Apache-2.0 project code and the GPL-2.0-only code therefore generally cannot be combined into one distributed work.

Source Disclosure

No issue

When the obligation applies, GPL-2.0 requires making available the complete corresponding source of the whole distributed work based on it.

Attribution

Obligations

GPL-2.0 requires the copyright and licence notices to be kept with copies you distribute.

Patent Considerations

Conflict

A distributed work containing GPL-2.0-only code must be licensed as a whole under GPL-2.0, and the FSF and the Apache Software Foundation consider Apache-2.0 code incompatible with GPL-2.0. The Apache-2.0 project code and the GPL-2.0-only code therefore generally cannot be combined into one distributed work.

Copyleft

Conflict

A distributed work containing GPL-2.0-only code must be licensed as a whole under GPL-2.0, and the FSF and the Apache Software Foundation consider Apache-2.0 code incompatible with GPL-2.0. The Apache-2.0 project code and the GPL-2.0-only code therefore generally cannot be combined into one distributed work.

SaaS / Network Use

No issue

The scenario does not include offering the software over a network. GPL-2.0 has no network-use clause.

Proprietary Use

No issue

The project is not declared proprietary.

Why?

  • A distributed work containing GPL-2.0-only code must be licensed as a whole under GPL-2.0, and the FSF and the Apache Software Foundation consider Apache-2.0 code incompatible with GPL-2.0. The Apache-2.0 project code and the GPL-2.0-only code therefore generally cannot be combined into one distributed work.
  • GPL-2.0 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, GPL-2.0 requires making available the complete corresponding source of the whole distributed work based on it.
  • GPL-2.0 requires the copyright and licence notices to be kept with copies you distribute.
  • GPL-2.0 permits distribution subject to its copyleft conditions.
  • GPL-2.0 contains no express patent licence. Any patent permission would depend on implied licence doctrines, which vary by jurisdiction.

What do I need to do?

  • Include the GPL-2.0 copyright notice and licence text with the distributed software (source, binary documentation or an "open-source notices" screen).
  • Check whether the component is actually "GPL-2.0-or-later"; if so the combination could be distributed under GPL-3.0.
  • Review the actual licence texts linked in the sources, and consider qualified legal advice for high-risk decisions.

Authoritative Sources

Rules applied

APACHE_GPL2_INCOMPATIBLE (CONFLICT), GPL_COMMERCIAL_USE (INFO), GPL_SOURCE_DISCLOSURE (INFO), GPL_ATTRIBUTION (INFO), GPL_DISTRIBUTION (INFO), PATENT_NO_EXPRESS_GRANT (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.

Popular licence comparisons

Related resources