Open Source License Risk Analyzer

For Informational Purposes: This tool provides a risk analysis based on your answers. It does not constitute legal advice and is not a substitute for consulting with a specialized lawyer.

🔒 100% Confidential Analysis: No project details, license text, or contract clauses are ever stored or shared.

1. What is your project's archetype?

This is the most critical choice as it determines the main legal risks.

Regulatory Context Is the project in a regulated industry (health, finance, etc.)?

📚 View the Complete 11 Open Source Licenses Guide & Comparison Matrix (MIT, Apache 2.0, GPLv3, AGPLv3, LGPL, MPL, CeCILL) →

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Can I use a GPL or AGPL component in commercial or SaaS software?

GPLv3 triggers source code disclosure obligations when distributing binaries, whereas AGPLv3 extends this obligation to software accessed over a network (SaaS / Cloud). Our analyzer evaluates both scenarios accurately.

What is the difference between dynamic and static linking for LGPL?

With weak copyleft licenses such as LGPLv3, dynamic linking allows proprietary software to use the library without disclosing proprietary source code, while static linking requires providing object files for relinking.

Are MIT and Apache 2.0 compatible with proprietary software?

Yes, permissive licenses (MIT, Apache 2.0, BSD-3-Clause, CeCILL-B) allow integration into distributed proprietary or SaaS software, provided copyright and notice files are retained.

Is my project analysis confidential?

Yes, the simulation runs instantaneously without storing your project identity or architecture details.