Integrate MIT- or BSD-licensed code into a product and redistribute a binary.
Which statement is generally appropriate?
MIT and BSD licenses are generally permissive: retain notices and comply with their terms while modifying or redistributing.
Detailed explanation
Incorrect. Requiring every modified file to use the same copyleft license is not the general MIT/BSD model.
Correct. These licenses commonly allow broad reuse when notices and disclaimers are preserved.
Incorrect. MIT/BSD licenses do not generally ban commercial use.
Incorrect. They are open-source licenses and do not prohibit source inspection.
Try it yourself
An example you can run in a temporary verification environment.
printf '%s\n' 'retain copyright and license notices'Expected result
retain copyright and license noticesKey points
- Permissive
- Notice preservation
- Commercial use
Notes
- Environment: MIT/BSD系ライセンスの一般的な特徴（具体条文を優先）
- 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.