<!DOCTYPE html><html><head><title>Choosing an Open Source License | Example Blog</title></head><body>
<header><nav><a href="/">Home</a> <a href="/about">About</a> <a href="/subscribe">Subscribe to the newsletter</a></nav></header>
<main><article>
<h1>Choosing an Open Source License</h1>
<p class="byline">By A. Writer</p>
<p>Picking a license is one of the first decisions a new open source project makes, and it shapes who can use the code and how. Permissive licenses let others reuse the code with few conditions, while copyleft licenses require that changes stay open.</p>
<h2>Permissive licenses</h2>
<p>The MIT and Apache 2.0 licenses are the most common permissive choices. Apache 2.0 adds an explicit patent grant, which matters to some companies that depend on the project.</p>
<ul><li>MIT: short and simple, attribution required.</li><li>Apache 2.0: attribution plus a patent grant.</li></ul>
<h2>Copyleft licenses</h2>
<p>The GPL family requires that distributed modifications are released under the same license. That keeps derivatives open but limits how the code can be combined with proprietary software.</p>
<p>Whatever you choose, put the license text in a file at the root of the repository so that people and tools can find it easily.</p>
</article></main>
<aside><h3>Related posts</h3><a href="/a">Something else entirely unrelated to licensing</a></aside>
<footer>Copyright Example Blog</footer>
</body></html>

<!DOCTYPE html><html><head><title>Choosing an Open Source License | Example Blog</title></head><body>
<header><nav><a href="/">Home</a> <a href="/about">About</a> <a href="/subscribe">Subscribe to the newsletter</a></nav></header>
<main><article>
<h1>Choosing an Open Source License</h1>
<p class="byline">By A. Writer</p>
<p>Picking a license is one of the first decisions a new open source project makes, and it shapes who can use the code and how. Permissive licenses let others reuse the code with few conditions, while copyleft licenses require that changes stay open.</p>
<h2>Permissive licenses</h2>
<p>The MIT and Apache 2.0 licenses are the most common permissive choices. Apache 2.0 adds an explicit patent grant, which matters to some companies that depend on the project.</p>
<ul><li>MIT: short and simple, attribution required.</li><li>Apache 2.0: attribution plus a patent grant.</li></ul>
<h2>Copyleft licenses</h2>
<p>The GPL family requires that distributed modifications are released under the same license. That keeps derivatives open but limits how the code can be combined with proprietary software.</p>
<p>Whatever you choose, put the license text in a file at the root of the repository so that people and tools can find it easily.</p>
</article></main>
<aside><h3>Related posts</h3><a href="/a">Something else entirely unrelated to licensing</a></aside>
<footer>Copyright Example Blog</footer>
</body></html>