Apache 2.0 License Generator

The Apache License 2.0 explained

The Apache License 2.0 was published in January 2004 by the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) and is one of the most widely used permissive open-source licenses in enterprise software. Unlike the MIT License, it explicitly addresses patents, trademarks and attribution, which makes it the default choice for large industry-driven projects where corporate legal teams need clear, defensible language.

It grants the usual permissive rights — use, copy, modify, distribute and sublicense — but adds important obligations: every distribution must include the LICENSE and NOTICE files, any modified files must carry prominent change notices, and the project's trademarks cannot be used to endorse or promote derivative works without separate permission.

Patent grant and termination clause

The defining feature of Apache 2.0 is its explicit patent grant: every contributor automatically licenses any patent claims that read on their contribution to all downstream users. Paired with this is a termination clause — if you initiate patent litigation against any contributor or user claiming the software infringes a patent, your Apache license is immediately revoked. This converts the license into a powerful defensive shield against patent aggression, which is why it is favored in machine learning, cryptography and networking projects.

Projects that use it

Kubernetes, the Android Open Source Project, Spring Framework, Hadoop, Tomcat, Kafka, Cassandra and TensorFlow are all Apache 2.0. Many of these projects additionally require contributors to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA) before pull requests can be merged — a CLA formalizes the copyright and patent assignment in writing and protects the project from later disputes.

NOTICE file and trademark

The NOTICE file is mandatory whenever attributions are present in the original work; downstream distributions must preserve and propagate it. The word "Apache" itself, as well as the ASF project names (Kafka, Spark, etc.), are registered trademarks — using them in a fork or derivative product name requires explicit ASF permission, even though the source code is freely reusable.

Compatibility and comparison with MIT

• Compatible with GPL v3, MIT, BSD and ISC.
• Not compatible with GPL v2 (the FSF considers the patent terms incompatible with GPL2's "no further restrictions" clause).
• Apache 2.0 is longer (~12,000 characters) but more defensible — preferred for enterprise / B2B projects.
• MIT is shorter and easier to reason about — preferred for small libraries and rapid adoption.

FAQ

Does Apache 2.0 require source-code disclosure? No. It is a permissive license. A downstream user can fork the project, modify it and ship a closed-source product — provided they include the LICENSE, NOTICE and change markers.

Is a CLA mandatory for every Apache project? No. CLAs are a project-level policy, not a license requirement. The ASF and large foundations use them; smaller Apache 2.0 projects often skip the CLA in favor of the implicit Apache 2.0 contributor terms.

Apache 2.0 or MIT for my new project? Use Apache 2.0 if you expect enterprise adoption, have any patent surface or care about clear contributor attribution; MIT if you want the absolute shortest, friction-free license for a small library.

Can my Apache 2.0 code be combined with GPL code? Yes with GPL v3, no with GPL v2-only projects. The combined work would be released under GPL v3.

Disclaimer. This generator produces a license template — it is not legal advice. For commercial products, patent-heavy domains or CLA design, consult an attorney.