Posted on 26th July 2020
For various reasons relating to https://github.com/MatthewDaws/AccessibleLaTeX I have ended up down a rabbit-hole of trying to understand Open Source Software Licenses, and related ideas, like Creative Commons. These are some notes for my own memory if nothing else.
Having spent ages reading about this, I am now not sure what to write. Wikipedia page. Pay attention to the "viral" nature of the license (I know that term is often used in a derogatory manner, but it is headline grabbing, and it is important to be aware of).
I asked a Question on StackExchange: Open Source. I am not a lawyer, but the following is my understanding:
With GPL3 or CC-SA (etc.) you are on very shaky grounds using a template licensed under one of these. Probably the output work (even a PDF generated by PDFLaTeX, though this is a debate) is also licensed under the same license.
I am not aware of an Open Source License which is well-adapted to templates. I would guess that in many cases, the author of template actually wants:
Of course, I can also see how writing a legal document which made clear this distinction could be hard. For low-level work which you yourself have produced, you are of course free to use CC-SA (or whatever) and also add a provision that a work based on the template is not so licensed.