Modify and distribute an MPL-covered file.
The same distribution also contains files under other licenses.
Which statement is generally appropriate?
MPL has a file-level copyleft character, so modified covered files may need source availability under MPL terms.
Detailed explanation
Correct. The modified MPL-covered file can remain subject to MPL source-provision conditions.
Incorrect. Other files in the distribution do not automatically become MPL.
Incorrect. MPL permits source use and modification under its conditions.
Incorrect. MPL is Mozilla Public License, not a cryptographic algorithm.
Try it yourself
An example you can run in a temporary verification environment.
printf '%s\n' 'modified covered files retain MPL obligations'Expected result
modified covered files retain MPL obligationsKey points
- MPL
- File-level scope
- Weak copyleft
Notes
- Environment: MPLの一般的な特徴（具体的な版の条文を優先）
- Command output formatting can vary slightly by distribution or tool version.
- Run the example in a temporary directory or process when possible.
Foundation review
License permission
The rights a license grants for use, modification, and redistribution.
Copyleft scope
The part of a combined work to which source-sharing conditions apply.
Attribution notice
Information that must remain with redistributed software or documentation.