GNU GPL 2.0 or later (GPL-2.0-or-later)
Same as GPL-2.0 but the 'or later' clause permits upgrading to GPLv3, which restores compatibility with GPLv3 and Apache-2.0 code (via the v3 path).
Key facts
- SPDX id
- GPL-2.0-or-later
- Category
- Strong copyleft
- Copyleft scope
- strong
- Express patent grant
- No
- SaaS triggers disclosure
- No
- GPL-compatible
- Yes — compatible with the GPL.
Obligations
When redistributing as open source.
- GPL-2.0-or-later: retain the copyright notice and license text.
- GPL-2.0-or-later: state significant changes made to the code.
- GPL-2.0-or-later: provide complete corresponding source of the combined work.
- GPL-2.0-or-later: the combined distributed work must be licensed under GPL-2.0-or-later.
Internal use only (never distributed)
- GPL-2.0-or-later: retain the copyright notice and license text.
- GPL-2.0-or-later: state significant changes made to the code.
Public SaaS / hosted web service
- GPL-2.0-or-later: retain the copyright notice and license text.
- GPL-2.0-or-later: state significant changes made to the code.
Commercial use
Commercial use is permitted, but distributing the combined work requires releasing the whole work under GPL-2.0-or-later with source. A closed-source binary is not possible.
- GPL-2.0-or-later: retain the copyright notice and license text.
- GPL-2.0-or-later: state significant changes made to the code.
- GPL-2.0-or-later: provide complete corresponding source of the combined work.
- GPL-2.0-or-later: the combined distributed work must be licensed under GPL-2.0-or-later.
Permissive: include notices (Apache also needs NOTICE + change statements). Weak copyleft: disclose only the modified library/files and, for LGPL static linking, provide a relink path. Strong copyleft (GPL): NOT possible to keep proprietary if GPL code is in the derivative work. AGPL: same as GPL plus network rules.
FAQ
- Can I use GPL-2.0-or-later in a commercial product?
- Commercial use is permitted, but distributing the combined work requires releasing the whole work under GPL-2.0-or-later with source. A closed-source binary is not possible.
- Do I have to open-source my code if I use GPL-2.0-or-later?
- Yes, when you distribute — the combined work's source must be provided under GPL-2.0-or-later. Internal use and SaaS hosting do not trigger it.
- Does running GPL-2.0-or-later software as a SaaS require source disclosure?
- No. Hosting is not distribution under GPL-2.0-or-later; running it as a service does not trigger source disclosure.
- Is GPL-2.0-or-later compatible with the GPL?
- Yes — compatible with the GPL.
Compatibility with other licenses
- Is GPL-2.0-or-later compatible with MIT? Yes
- Is BSD-2-Clause compatible with GPL-2.0-or-later? Yes
- Is BSD-3-Clause compatible with GPL-2.0-or-later? Yes
- Is GPL-2.0-or-later compatible with ISC? Yes
- Is Apache-2.0 compatible with GPL-2.0-or-later? It depends
- Is BSL-1.0 compatible with GPL-2.0-or-later? Yes
- Is GPL-2.0-or-later compatible with Unlicense? Yes
- Is CC0-1.0 compatible with GPL-2.0-or-later? Yes
- Is GPL-2.0-or-later compatible with MPL-2.0? It depends
- Is EPL-2.0 compatible with GPL-2.0-or-later? It depends
- Is GPL-2.0-or-later compatible with LGPL-2.1? It depends
- Is GPL-2.0-or-later compatible with LGPL-3.0? It depends
- Is GPL-2.0-only compatible with GPL-2.0-or-later? It depends
- Is GPL-2.0-or-later compatible with GPL-3.0-only? Yes
- Is AGPL-3.0 compatible with GPL-2.0-or-later? It depends