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 Proprietary-licensed code in a project under LGPL-3.0
Manual Review Required
Using Proprietary-licensed code in a project under LGPL-3.0 requires review of the actual licence terms.
Confidence: low
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
ReviewThe component is under proprietary terms. Whether it may be used, modified, redistributed, resold or white-labelled depends entirely on the specific licence agreement.
Modification
ReviewThe component is under proprietary terms. Whether it may be used, modified, redistributed, resold or white-labelled depends entirely on the specific licence agreement.
Distribution
ReviewThe component is under proprietary terms. Whether it may be used, modified, redistributed, resold or white-labelled depends entirely on the specific licence agreement.
Source Disclosure
No issueSee Proprietary source-disclosure conditions.
Attribution
No issueProprietary attribution requirements apply on distribution.
Patent Considerations
No issuePatent terms are unknown.
Copyleft
No issueProprietary has no copyleft.
SaaS / Network Use
No issueThe scenario does not include offering the software over a network. Proprietary has no network-use clause.
Proprietary Use
ReviewThe component is under proprietary terms. Whether it may be used, modified, redistributed, resold or white-labelled depends entirely on the specific licence agreement.
Why?
- The component is under proprietary terms. Whether it may be used, modified, redistributed, resold or white-labelled depends entirely on the specific licence agreement.
What do I need to do?
- Read the component's licence agreement for use, modification, redistribution, sublicensing and transfer rights.
- Confirm the licence covers your number of end products, users or deployments.
- Review the actual licence texts linked in the sources, and consider qualified legal advice for high-risk decisions.
Authoritative Sources
Rules applied
PROPRIETARY_COMPONENT_TERMS (REVIEW)
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.