I haven't visited the Orge site long ago, i found an interesting news, that they switching license to MIT! The motivation & conclusions why they decided to switch are very interesting: --- citation --- Won’t this mean people can ‘rip off’ OGRE in proprietary software? The LGPL already allowed OGRE to be used in proprietary software, and this is something we’ve always encouraged. The main difference between the LGPL and the MIT License is that there is no requirement to release modified source code; only to include our copyright and the MIT license text in the final product. While not requiring modified source to be released might initially seem like giving up an important motivator to contribute code back to the community, we’ve noticed something in recent years: 99% of useful code contributions come from people who are motivated to participate in the project regardless of what the license tells them they have to do. It’s our experience that a certain percentage of the user community will always participate and contribute back, and therefore encouraging adoption via simpler licensing is likely to result in more contributions overall than coersion via complex and restrictive licensing does. In addition, people who are internally motivated to participate tend to provide much higher quality and more usable contributions than those who only do it because they are forced to. --- citation --- you can read the full article here: http://www.ogre3d.org/2009/09/15/ogre-will-switch-to-the-mit-license-from-1-... P.S. i found it a very good sign, that more and more open-source communities gradually moving towards more permissive license, as MIT is. -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.