# Adding OpenMRS license to modules

**URL:** <https://talk.openmrs.org/t/adding-openmrs-license-to-modules/894>\
**Category:** Repo Management\
**Created:** [December 2, 2014, 5:09am UTC](https://talk.openmrs.org/t/adding-openmrs-license-to-modules/894 "2014-12-02T05:09:15Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![sunbiz](https://talk.openmrs.org/user_avatar/talk.openmrs.org/sunbiz/32/520_2.png) [@sunbiz](https://talk.openmrs.org/u/sunbiz)\
**Post date:** [December 2, 2014, 5:09am UTC](https://talk.openmrs.org/t/adding-openmrs-license-to-modules/894/1 "2014-12-02T05:09:15Z")

</div>

Hi, I had a recent interview (for research purposes) with Akhil Ravindran and he was very open to keep the radiology-dcm4chee as open licensed as possible. We have a GCI issue - [https://issues.openmrs.org/browse/GCI-6](https://issues.openmrs.org/browse/GCI-6) and here the students are writing the MPLv2+disclaimer to modules

Now, I wonder if the module authors donated the code to be included in OpenMRS github org. Does that mean the license can be changed with the author permission? Are all the modules listed under openmrs org in github mean, they are owned by OpenMRS as well?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![burke](https://talk.openmrs.org/user_avatar/talk.openmrs.org/burke/32/17_2.png) [@burke](https://talk.openmrs.org/u/burke)\
**Post date:** [December 4, 2014, 4:29pm UTC](https://talk.openmrs.org/t/adding-openmrs-license-to-modules/894/2 "2014-12-04T16:29:46Z")

</div>

We have yet to formalize this, but my bias is that [http://github.com/openmrs/](http://github.com/openmrs/) should be focused on [community-supported and community-owned repositories](https://wiki.openmrs.org/x/O4HTAw) and _not_ hosting all community repositories.[1] The assumption that any work that is OpenMRS-related should be under the OpenMRS org in GitHub is not scalable. For example, GSoC repos should move under the organization only when/if they become community-supported or community-owned. There’s nothing wrong with using a repository under a community member’s account as the “official” repository.

Community-supported & community-owned repositories should be under OpenMRS license (OPL 1 or MPL2+HD) in most cases, perhaps with a few using some other OSI-approved license when there’s a reason to do so. In all cases, they should be copyrighted to OpenMRS so that there are no issues/concerns about what the community can do with the code or its licensing/copyright going forward.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![michael](https://talk.openmrs.org/user_avatar/talk.openmrs.org/michael/32/15070_2.png) [@michael](https://talk.openmrs.org/u/michael)\
**Post date:** [December 4, 2014, 4:56pm UTC](https://talk.openmrs.org/t/adding-openmrs-license-to-modules/894/3 "2014-12-04T16:56:05Z")

</div>

> [@burke](#):
>
> copyrighted to OpenMRS

This should likely first be reconciled with the (Draft) [Copyright](https://wiki.openmrs.org/display/RES/DRAFT+OpenMRS+Copyright+and+DMCA+Policy) & [Contribution](https://wiki.openmrs.org/display/RES/DRAFT+OpenMRS+Contribution+Policy) Policies.