LGPL-2.1 vs. MPL-1.1

Attribute	LGPL-2.1	MPL-1.1
License Type	LGPL-2.1	MPL-1.1
Compatibility with GPL	Yes	No
Dynamic Linking	Allowed	Allowed
Static Linking	Allowed	Allowed
Derived Works	Allowed	Allowed

License Scope

The GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL) version 2.1 and the Mozilla Public License (MPL) version 1.1 are both open-source licenses that govern the use and distribution of software. However, they have different scopes in terms of the types of software they cover. The LGPL is primarily designed for libraries, allowing developers to link their proprietary software with the library without requiring the proprietary software to be open source. On the other hand, the MPL is more focused on standalone software applications, requiring any modifications to the original code to be made available under the MPL.

Compatibility

One key difference between the LGPL-2.1 and MPL-1.1 is their compatibility with other licenses. The LGPL is considered more permissive in terms of compatibility, as it allows developers to combine LGPL-licensed code with code under different licenses, including proprietary licenses. This flexibility makes the LGPL a popular choice for libraries that need to be integrated into a variety of projects. In contrast, the MPL is more restrictive in terms of compatibility, as any modifications to MPL-licensed code must be made available under the MPL, which may not be compatible with all other licenses.

Derivative Works

Another important aspect to consider when comparing the LGPL-2.1 and MPL-1.1 is how they handle derivative works. The LGPL allows developers to create derivative works based on the original code and distribute them under different licenses, as long as the original LGPL-licensed code remains under the LGPL. This allows for greater flexibility in how the code can be used and distributed. In contrast, the MPL requires any modifications to the original code to be made available under the MPL, which can limit the ways in which the code can be modified and distributed.

Copyleft Provision

Both the LGPL-2.1 and MPL-1.1 include copyleft provisions, which require any modifications to the original code to be made available under the same license. However, the copyleft provision in the LGPL is less strict than in the MPL. The LGPL allows developers to link their proprietary software with an LGPL-licensed library without requiring the proprietary software to be open source. This makes the LGPL more permissive in terms of allowing proprietary software to be combined with open-source code. On the other hand, the MPL requires any modifications to the original code to be made available under the MPL, which can be more restrictive for developers.

Community and Support

When choosing between the LGPL-2.1 and MPL-1.1, developers may also consider the community and support surrounding each license. The LGPL is a widely used open-source license with a large community of developers and contributors. This can provide valuable support and resources for developers using the LGPL in their projects. On the other hand, the MPL is less commonly used compared to the LGPL, which may result in fewer resources and support available for developers using the MPL. Developers should consider the level of community and support they need when deciding between the LGPL and MPL.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the LGPL-2.1 and MPL-1.1 are both open-source licenses that govern the use and distribution of software, but they have different attributes that developers should consider when choosing between them. The LGPL is more permissive in terms of compatibility and allows for greater flexibility in how the code can be used and distributed. On the other hand, the MPL is more restrictive in terms of compatibility and requires any modifications to the original code to be made available under the MPL. Developers should carefully evaluate their needs and the requirements of their projects when deciding between the LGPL and MPL.