Hi Everyone, Just wanted to understand regarding t...

# android

[ritesh]

Hi Everyone,
Just wanted to understand regarding the MIT license. If there's a open source lib under MIT license and i copy one of it's whole class file in my android application.
Do i need to give credits to the original author in the class file header, considering the legality of it. I read online and yes it makes sense to add credit as one of the reason and other reasons like helping future dev to go the source code as ref and all.
But, just considering the legality of it, if someone's fails to add the credit - does that mean the MIT license is violated?

[Saul Wiggin]

It’s typical to have an MIT license as standard. I’ve worked with applications have developed there on license containing contributors.

[Vampire]

It depends on what your android app has as license whether it is legal at all to use that code as some licenses are incompatible, even open source licenses. Look here for example: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/License_compatibility#Compatibility_of_FOSS_licenses

Other than that, first the typical IANAL disclaimer and the recommendation to ask an actual lawyer if you want a reliable answer.
With that being done, as far as I remember just mentioning the original author in the source is not enough, but you have to include the license and copyright notice with the software.
But better read the license text, ask a lawyer and / or google for explanations of the right way to adhere to the license. :-)

[ritesh]

I see applications using libraries like Retrofit, RxJava, ButterKnife etc. all open-source libs under Apache or MIT license. And devs use these libs in the production without giving credit or pasting the license file and copyright mentioned in those libs.
Does that means it violates the license is violated?
Not specific to one single library but all.

[Vampire]

Quite possible
As I said, IANAL (I am not a lawyer), but if the license says you have to do so and you don't, it is most probably a copyright violation.
Of course it only starts to be a substantial problem if someone actually complains, but you never know.

For example an example I was just told about, Bukkit API and CraftBukkit which was some plugin or extension or something. Bukkit API was GPL, CraftBukkit used something from it / copied something from it and was released under LGPL. Then some Bukkit API guy was pissed and sued CraftBukkit which then did some strange surviving tactics I don't remember. Something so that the user has to provide the correct things instead or similar, something to not anymore violate the GPL of Bukkit API.