Open source software needs a license, because without one, other developers have no clear legal permission to use, copy or modify the code, even when it is published publicly. Choosing a license and writing its file correctly is a chore that many projects postpone, which leaves their legal status ambiguous. This generator produces a complete license file for the three most widely used permissive and copyleft licenses: MIT, Apache 2.0 and GPL, with your name and the year filled in where the license requires them. The output is the standard license text for the chosen license, ready to save as a LICENSE file at your repository root. Using a standard license also helps automated tools recognise your project’s terms, which matters because hosting platforms, package registries and compliance scanners all look for a recognisable license file before they classify a project as open source.
Quick Answer: Choose a license, enter your name and the year, and click Generate License to get the complete license text.
Free Online Tool
License File Generator
Complete MIT, Apache 2.0 or GPL license text with your details.
How to Use the License File Generator
- Choose the license that matches how you want others to use your code.
- Enter the copyright holder name, usually your name or your organisation.
- Enter the year, or the year range, for the copyright notice.
- Click Generate License to produce the full license text with your details filled in.
- Save the result as a file named LICENSE at the root of your repository.
Key Features
- MIT license generation with the standard permission notice and copyright line.
- Apache 2.0 generation with its copyright appendix completed from your details.
- GPL generation with the standard notice and instructions for applying it to a program.
- Automatic year and name insertion, so no placeholder text is left in the output.
- Complete license text, not a summary, so the file is usable as the project’s actual license.
Best Practices and Tips
- Pick MIT for maximum simplicity and permissiveness, Apache 2.0 when you also want an explicit patent grant, and GPL when you want derivative works to stay open.
- Use the same license across a project and its documentation where possible, to avoid confusing mixed licensing.
- Keep the copyright year current when you start a project, and consider a year range for projects maintained over several years.
- If your project combines code under different licenses, check compatibility before choosing, since not every license mixes freely.
Common Mistakes to Avoid
- Publishing code with no license at all, which by default reserves all rights and blocks reuse.
- Copying a license file but leaving another author’s name in the copyright line.
- Choosing a license based only on popularity without reading what it requires of people who reuse the code.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which license should I choose?
MIT is the simplest permissive choice and suits most small projects. Apache 2.0 adds an explicit patent grant and is common in larger ecosystems. GPL requires derivative works to be distributed under the same license, which suits projects that want to guarantee openness downstream. The right choice depends on your goals, not on fashion.
Is the generated text the real license?
Yes. The generator outputs the standard text of the chosen license with only the copyright holder and year fields completed. It is the same text used by thousands of projects, and it is intended to be saved and used as the project’s license file.
Do I need a lawyer to use this?
For a standard open source project using a standard license, no. These licenses are designed to be used as written. If your project has unusual ownership, employment or patent circumstances, professional advice is still worthwhile.
Where should the LICENSE file go?
At the root of the repository, named LICENSE, where hosting platforms and license detection tools look for it. A license buried in a subfolder may not be detected automatically.