Cambridge A-Level Computer Science 9618 – 7.1 Ethics and Ownership
7.1 Ethics and Ownership
Objective
Show understanding of the different types of software licensing and justify the use of a licence for a given situation.
1. Why Licences Matter
Software licences define the legal rights and responsibilities of both the creator and the user. They protect intellectual property, ensure ethical use, and influence how software can be shared, modified, or commercialised.
2. Common Types of Software Licences
Proprietary (Commercial) Licence – The author retains full control; users receive a limited right to use the software.
Freeware – Free to use, but source code is not provided and modification is usually prohibited.
Shareware – Distributed for trial; full functionality is unlocked after payment.
Open‑Source Licences
GNU General Public Licence (GPL)
MIT Licence
Apache Licence
BSD Licence
3. Comparison of Licence Types
Licence Type
Permission to Use
Permission to Modify
Distribution Rights
Cost
Typical Use Cases
Proprietary
Yes, under strict terms
No
Only the author may distribute
Paid (licence fee)
Commercial products, enterprise software
Freeware
Yes, free of charge
No
Usually not allowed
Free
Utility tools, demo versions
Shareware
Yes, trial period
No (unless paid)
Limited – often prohibited until purchase
Free trial, then paid
Games, specialised utilities
GPL (Copyleft)
Yes, free
Yes
Must distribute under same licence
Free
Community projects, libraries requiring openness
MIT / BSD (Permissive)
Yes, free
Yes
Can re‑license, even commercially
Free
Frameworks, APIs, start‑up projects
Apache
Yes, free
Yes
Allows patent‑grant and commercial use
Free
Server software, large‑scale projects
4. Choosing an Appropriate Licence
When selecting a licence, consider the following factors:
Intended Audience – Are users commercial customers, students, or the general public?
Desired Level of Openness – Do you want others to modify and redistribute the code?
Commercial Goals – Will you sell the software or offer paid support?
Compatibility – Does the licence need to be compatible with other libraries you use?
Legal Protection – Do you need patent clauses or warranty limitations?
5. Case Study: Selecting a Licence for an Educational App
Situation: A group of A‑Level students have developed a mobile app that helps learners practise mathematics. The app is intended to be freely available to schools, but the developers also wish to allow other teachers to adapt it for their curricula.
Analysis:
Goal: Free distribution to schools → no cost barrier.
Goal: Allow modification and redistribution → encourages community improvement.
Goal: Preserve attribution to original creators.
Recommended Licence:MIT Licence (or alternatively a BSD 3‑Clause Licence).
Provides free use and modification.
Allows commercial reuse if a school wishes to integrate it into a paid platform.
Requires only that the original copyright notice and licence text be retained, satisfying the attribution requirement.
If the developers want to ensure that any derivative work also remains open, they could choose the GNU GPL v3 instead, which enforces copyleft.
Suggested diagram: Flowchart showing decision points for selecting a licence (audience → openness → commercial intent → licence choice).
6. Ethical Considerations
Beyond legal compliance, ethical issues include:
Respecting the intellectual property of others.
Ensuring accessibility for disadvantaged users.
Avoiding software that infringes on privacy or security.
Providing clear attribution and avoiding plagiarism.
7. Summary
Understanding software licences enables developers to protect their work, share it responsibly, and align with ethical standards. By analysing the purpose, audience, and commercial intent, a suitable licence can be justified for any given situation.
8. Self‑Check Questions
What is the main difference between a copyleft licence (e.g., GPL) and a permissive licence (e.g., MIT)?
Give an example of a scenario where a proprietary licence would be the most appropriate choice.
Why might a developer choose a shareware model instead of freeware?
In the case study, what ethical benefit does using an open‑source licence provide to the educational community?