Wondering whether you can use, change or sell software under this licence? Here is the Apache 2.0 license explained: it lets you use, modify and distribute the code freely, including commercially, if you keep notices and the licence text.
It is one of the best-known licences in open source software, and this guide walks through what it allows and requires.
| Item | What the licence says |
|---|---|
| Version and date | Version 2.0, January 2004 |
| Copyright permission | Perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable |
| Patent permission | Perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable (except as stated in the licence) |
| Patent lawsuit effect | Patent licences end on the date the litigation is filed |
| Trademark permission | Not granted, apart from describing the origin of the work |
| Warranty | None: provided “AS IS” |
The figures and wording come from the licence text as published by SPDX. Licence texts and listings can be updated, so check the source before you rely on them.
What the Apache 2.0 licence is
The Apache License is a permissive licence. It gives anyone who receives the software broad rights to run it, study it, change it and pass it on, with only a short list of conditions attached.
The text published by SPDX is headed “Apache License Version 2.0, January 2004”. It is used by many projects, and it is also the licence a developer attaches to their own work by adding a short header to each file.
Permissive means the licence does not force you to release your own changes or your own larger product under the same terms. That is the main contrast with copyleft licences, covered later in this guide.
For a small team, this matters in practice. You can build a product on permissive code without having to decide, on day one, whether your whole codebase must be published.
It also matters for contributors. When someone sends a change to an Apache-licensed project, the same grant of copyright and patent permissions applies to that contribution, so users receive clear rights from every contributor and not only from the original author.
What you are allowed to do
The copyright grant is wide. Each contributor gives you a licence to reproduce, prepare derivative works of, publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense and distribute the work, in source or object form.
In everyday terms, the licence lets you:
- Use the software for any purpose, including inside a business.
- Modify the code to fit your needs.
- Distribute the original or your modified version, free or for a fee.
- Combine it with code under other licences, including closed code, as long as you meet the Apache conditions for the Apache-licensed part.
The grant is described as perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free and irrevocable. Once you have the code under these terms, the author cannot later withdraw the permission for that version.
What you must do in return
The conditions are modest. If you pass the software on, the licence says you may do so “in any medium, with or without modifications, and in Source or Object form”, provided you meet its conditions, starting with giving other recipients a copy of the licence.
A practical checklist when you redistribute:
- Include a copy of the licence with what you distribute.
- Mark any files you changed with a prominent notice that you changed them.
- Keep the existing copyright, patent, trademark and attribution notices in the source form.
- If the project ships a NOTICE file, carry its readable content into your distribution.
The NOTICE file matters less than people fear. The licence states that “The contents of the NOTICE file are for informational purposes only and do not modify the License.”
You may add your own copyright statement and your own licence terms to your changes. Those terms may not stop anyone from using the original work under the Apache terms.
The patent clause, in plain words
This is the feature that sets version 2.0 apart from very short licences. Each contributor grants you a patent licence to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell, import and otherwise transfer the work.
That grant covers only the patent claims the contributor can license and that their own contribution necessarily infringes. It does not hand you rights to unrelated patents the contributor holds.
There is a defensive catch. The licence says that if you start patent litigation alleging the work infringes a patent, “any patent licenses granted to You under this License for that Work shall terminate as of the date such litigation is filed.”
The aim is to discourage a user from taking the software for free and then suing the community over patents. For an ordinary business user who never sues over the work, the clause changes nothing.
What the licence does not give you
Three limits are worth knowing before you build a product around Apache-licensed code.
- No trademark rights. The licence “does not grant permission to use the trade names, trademarks, service marks, or product names of the Licensor”, except for reasonable, customary description of where the work came from.
- No warranty. The work is provided on an “AS IS” basis, without warranties or conditions of any kind, including title, non-infringement, merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose.
- No guarantee of support. Nothing in the text obliges anyone to fix bugs or answer questions.
So you can fork a project and sell your version, but you cannot sell it under the original project’s name or logo unless you get separate permission.
Common mistakes to avoid
Most problems with this licence come from small oversights, not from the legal design. A few patterns come up again and again.
- Dropping the licence text. Copying code into your product and deleting the licence file breaks the first redistribution condition.
- Stripping notices. Removing copyright or attribution lines from source files goes against the requirement to keep them.
- Silent edits. Changing a file without marking that you changed it misses the modified-files condition.
- Borrowing the name. Shipping a fork under the original project’s name or logo is a trademark issue, not a copyright one.
- Assuming a guarantee. Treating the software as if the authors promised it works, when the licence says the opposite.
A simple habit helps: keep a folder in your repository that holds every third-party licence and NOTICE file, and update it whenever you add a dependency.
How it compares with other licences
Permissive licences such as Apache and MIT ask little of you. Copyleft licences such as the GPL require that distributed derivative works stay open under the same terms.
The difference between the Apache approach and the others is covered in a separate comparison ofgpl vs mit license. Apache sits near MIT in spirit but adds the explicit patent grant and the notice rules described above.
Licence choice also affects your wider strategy. If you are weighing a free codebase against a paid product, the trade-offs are laid out in open source vs proprietary software.
This guide is general education, not legal advice. For a commercial product or a dispute, have a qualified lawyer read the actual licence and your project’s files.
Using the licence on your own project
If you write software and want others to reuse it freely, the licence text itself describes how to apply it. You attach a short notice to your files that says the work is licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0, and points readers to the full text at apache.org.
That notice also states that, unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, the software is distributed on an “AS IS” basis, without warranties or conditions of any kind. Include the full licence file in the repository root so every recipient receives it.
Before you choose it, think about your goals. If you want everyone who builds on your code to share their changes back, a copyleft licence fits better. If you want the widest adoption with the fewest strings, and a clear patent position, a permissive licence like this one is a sensible choice.
Frequently asked questions
Can I use Apache-licensed software in a commercial product?
Yes. The licence grants a no-charge, royalty-free right to use, modify and distribute the work, so commercial use is allowed. You must still meet the redistribution conditions, such as including the licence text.
Do I have to publish my changes?
No. The licence requires you to mark changed files and keep notices, but it does not require you to release your modifications’ source code.
Does the licence cover trademarks?
No. It does not grant permission to use the licensor’s trade names, trademarks, service marks or product names, other than to describe the origin of the work.
Is there a warranty?
No. The work is provided “AS IS”, without warranties or conditions of any kind, so any risk of using it stays with you.
