Hi Burke and others, I’m still here but mostly silent.
Among the things I enjoy the least in open source projects are these infernal questions about FOSS license compatibility; Everyone has an opinion and (in my opinion as a lawyer!) only a few are right. I live this topic continually in Apache, and every such compatibility question results in long, boring license discussion email threads there.
I was hoping I wouldn’t relive it here at OpenMRS also. Every person has at least two opinions and I’m tired of hearing them. Sorry, but I’ve done this work as an open source lawyer for too long to pretend to have all the answers…
So we included the following in the OpenMRS Contribution Policy:
Approved Open Source Licenses for OpenMRS Contributions
OpenMRS relies on the recommendations of Open Source Initiative, the Free Software Foundation, and Creative Commons to determine which free and open source licenses are compatible with the Mozilla Public License 2.0 with Healthcare Disclaimer (MPL 2.0 HD) under which OpenMRS distributes software and documentation.
Some of those licenses may not be compatible with the license requirements of some commercial companies. That is another purpose for the NOTICE file that OpenMRS projects provide with each software distribution. Each downstream modifier and/or distributor of OpenMRS software and documentation is responsible for making such license compatibility determinations for itself.
Rest assured that OpenMRS software and documentation can be used for free by everyone in the world under the open source MPL 2.0 HD license.
So I’ll summarize my indirect answer to your question: Ask Open Source Initiative, the Free Software Foundation, or Creative Commons. Let the experts there advise you about license compatibility with MPL 2.0 HD.
Please don’t allow the OpenMRS project to be consumed by licensing threads.
“If this were legal advice it would have been accompanied by a bill.”