# Why I Switched to EUPL for My Software Projects

A developer shares his journey through software licensing eras.

- **Source:** [Hacker News](https://news.ycombinator.com)
- **Published:** 2026-09-06
- **Topic:** [Data & AI](https://brifing.si/c/data-ai)
- **Original article:** <https://bergie.iki.fi/blog/eupl/>
- **On Brifing:** https://brifing.si/s/e41107ad-a153-4b7e-b992-ea1f7b2ac61b

## The Early Days: LGPLv2

The author's first era used LGPLv2 for Midgard, a web framework, aligning with the simpler licensing landscape of the late 90s. This weak copyleft allowed flexibility while maintaining some open-source principles. The accompanying example website used the even more permissive X11 license, typical for that period's collaborative ethos.

## JavaScript Shift to MIT

By 2011, JavaScript work led to adopting the MIT license, favored by NPM's ecosystem. This ultra-permissive 'no strings attached' approach maximized interoperability but gave all rights to users. The choice reflected industry trends toward minimal restrictions during the package management boom.

## Post-Flowhub Hiatus

After closing Flowhub, software publishing paused for years due to work constraints and personal projects. This gap coincided with growing industry debates about open-source sustainability and corporate exploitation, setting the stage for a licensing philosophy change.

## EUPL-1.2 as New Standard

The 2023 shift to EUPL-1.2 marks a stark departure - this OSI-approved strong copyleft license closes SaaS loopholes by mandating reciprocity regardless of distribution method. Created by the EU, it legally binds derivative works to open terms, preventing proprietary commercialization.

## Open Source's Failed Promise

The author argues permissive licenses primarily benefited corporations, enabling cheaper R&D without reciprocation. While 'open source' won ideological debates, it failed to protect developer rights or user freedoms, instead accelerating wealth concentration in tech giants.

## Corporate Accountability

EUPL adoption represents a stance against uncompensated corporate use: companies must either comply with reciprocal terms or build alternatives. This counters decades of extractive relationships where firms profit from community work without contributing back.

## Multilingual Legal Advantage

EUPL's 23 official translations provide unique global enforceability beyond English-dominant licenses. This matters as most software development now occurs outside Silicon Valley, requiring frameworks that work across legal jurisdictions and languages.

## Practical Implementation

Current projects like the NoFlo Dev Environment rewrite use EUPL, while established tools like NoFlo remain MIT-licensed due to third-party contributions. This pragmatic approach balances principle with existing community commitments, demonstrating transitional strategies for license evolution.

## Sources covering this story

- https://bergie.iki.fi/blog/eupl/ — 

---

_Summary written by Brifing from the original reporting. Copyright in the original article belongs to its publisher; read the full piece at the link above._