An Artistic-1.0-style license for Open Group conformance suites. Free to run and change, but changed tests must be renamed and the suite itself may not be sold.
On this page
What it does
The Open Group Test Suite License covers conformance test suites published by The Open Group. It is built on the Artistic License 1.0, not on BSD, and it borrows that license's vocabulary: the Package, the Standard Version, and the Copyright Holder who keeps artistic control. You may run the suite, copy it, modify it, and pass it on, and you may bundle it into a larger commercial distribution. Three things set it apart from a permissive license. Clause 5 says you may not charge a fee for the Package itself, only a reasonable copying fee or a fee for support. Clause 3 says a changed file needs a prominent notice stating how and when you changed it. Clauses 3 and 4 say non-standard executables and test cases have to be renamed, shipped alongside the Standard Version, and documented.
Details
Internal use is the easy case. Running an Open Group suite inside your own build pipeline hands nothing to anyone, so there is nothing to publish. The conditions bite when the suite, or a modified copy of it, leaves your organisation. A patched test case you share with a partner has to carry a new name, the original next to it, and a manual page that explains the difference. The fee rule matters for anyone selling test tooling. The suite may ride inside a larger paid product, but it may not be the product, and you may not advertise it as your own. A test suite is easy to mistake for an ordinary library, so read the text before you build a product on it.
Pros
- Easy to drop into a closed, paid product. Procurement has seen this family hundreds of times.
- No copyleft on your own files. You keep your source private.
Cons
- The notice duty is easy to miss in a desktop, mobile, or container build. A web page is not a substitute for notices inside the artifact.
- Buyers who want an express patent grant will ask you to prefer Apache-2.0 over a short MIT-style text.
What it allows and requires
Choose a category to see the full grant in one scannable list. Permissions show what the license allows, limits show what it withholds, and obligations show the conditions your release process must satisfy.
Permissions
Commercial use
You may ship the code inside a paid product. The license does not restrict commercial use.
Modify
You may change the code, including keeping those changes private, unless a later obligation says otherwise.
Distribute
You may give copies to others. Distribution is what usually turns notice and source duties into real work.
Sublicense
You may include the code under your own product terms, so long as you still meet this license's conditions.
Private use
Use inside your company, including internal forks, does not by itself trigger distribution duties.
Limits
Hold liable
The authors disclaim warranty. Recipients cannot hold them liable for damages arising from the software, except where law forbids that disclaimer.
Use trademark
The license is not a trademark license. Names, logos and product marks stay with their owners unless a separate grant says otherwise.
Patent grant
The text does not grant patents. If buyers want an express patent grant, Apache-2.0 is the usual alternative.
Obligations
Include copyright
Keep the copyright line with every copy or substantial portion you distribute.
Include license
Keep the license text with every copy or substantial portion you distribute. A web page is not a substitute for notices inside a shipped artifact.
What OGTSL requires when you ship
When a copy that includes OGTSL code leaves your company, the grant is broad and the paperwork is easy to miss. Distribution here means an installer, a mobile binary, a container image, or an SDK another team embeds. Work this list against the artifact you actually hand over, not against a README. A hosted service that never gives out a copy still belongs on the record, but the notice duty does not fire until a copy exists.
You are clear for internal testing when the suite stays inside your organisation, because the conditions attach to copies you distribute to other people.
You are meeting clause 3 when every file you changed carries a prominent notice saying how and when you changed it, and the original notices stay in place.
You are meeting clauses 3 and 4 when non-standard executables and test cases carry names that do not clash with the standard ones, ship alongside the Standard Version, and have a manual page documenting the differences.
You are meeting clause 5 when you charge no fee for the Package itself. A copying fee, a support fee, or bundling it into a larger commercial distribution is allowed, as long as you do not advertise it as your own product.
You are respecting clause 8 when nothing you publish uses the copyright holder's name to endorse or promote a product derived from the suite without written permission.
The duties named in OGTSL
The license text itself is short. These are the named conditions. They follow the code, including files you vendor into your own repository and transitive packages in the lockfile.
Include copyright
Keep the copyright line with every copy or substantial portion you distribute.
Include license
Keep the license text with every copy or substantial portion you distribute. A web page is not a substitute for notices inside a shipped artifact.
Things to be aware of
- A conformance suite is filed as BSD-style permissive and repackaged into a paid product. The fee rule and the renaming duties are the whole point of this license.
- A modified test case is shared with a partner under its original name and with no change note. Rename it, ship the Standard Version next to it, and document what differs.
- A passing run turns into marketing that uses The Open Group's name. Keep test results factual, and keep the copyright holder's name out of endorsement wording.
What the Open Group Test Suite License does not do
Search results often flatten Open Group Test Suite License into a slogan. These are the usual misreads. OGTSL is a grant with conditions, not a permission to skip the paperwork below.
- the Open Group Test Suite License does not require you to publish your own source. Combining it with closed code is the point of the grant.
- the Open Group Test Suite License does not mean "no obligations." The copyright line and license text still have to travel with copies you hand to other people.
- It is not a patent license unless the text says so. MIT-family grants say nothing about patents.
How OGTSL differs from nearby licenses
These licenses are often confused with OGTSL, but their release duties differ. Each row summarizes what the license requires when you ship. Open the linked page for the full checklist.
- OGTSL
- An Artistic-1.0-style license for Open Group conformance suites. Free to run and change, but changed tests must be renamed and the suite itself may not be sold.
- BSD-3-Clause
- Permissive like MIT, with one extra rule: you may not use the authors' names to promote your product. Notices travel with source and binaries.
- MPL-2.0
- File-scoped copyleft. The MPL files stay open when you ship a binary, modified or not. Your own separate files stay yours.
Common questions about Open Group Test Suite License
Answers to common questions about what Open Group Test Suite License requires, when its duties apply, and what evidence belongs with a release.
What is the Open Group Test Suite License?
The Open Group Test Suite License covers conformance test suites published by The Open Group. It is built on the Artistic License 1.0, not on BSD, and it borrows that license's vocabulary: the Package, the Standard Version, and the Copyright Holder who keeps artistic control. You may run the suite, copy it, modify it, and pass it on, and you may bundle it into a larger commercial distribution. Three things set it apart from a permissive license. Clause 5 says you may not charge a fee for the Package itself, only a reasonable copying fee or a fee for support. Clause 3 says a changed file needs a prominent notice stating how and when you changed it. Clauses 3 and 4 say non-standard executables and test cases have to be renamed, shipped alongside the Standard Version, and documented.
What does OGTSL require when you ship a product?
You are clear for internal testing when the suite stays inside your organisation, because the conditions attach to copies you distribute to other people. You are meeting clause 3 when every file you changed carries a prominent notice saying how and when you changed it, and the original notices stay in place. You are meeting clauses 3 and 4 when non-standard executables and test cases carry names that do not clash with the standard ones, ship alongside the Standard Version, and have a manual page documenting the differences. You are meeting clause 5 when you charge no fee for the Package itself. A copying fee, a support fee, or bundling it into a larger commercial distribution is allowed, as long as you do not advertise it as your own product. You are respecting clause 8 when nothing you publish uses the copyright holder's name to endorse or promote a product derived from the suite without written permission.
Does OGTSL require me to open my own source?
It is not a patent license unless the text says so. MIT-family grants say nothing about patents.
How do I attribute OGTSL in a product I ship?
Attribution for OGTSL means the copyright line and the license text travel with every copy a recipient actually gets. That can be an about screen, a licenses file inside the installer, or a notice in the container image. A public page helps a buyer audit the inventory. It does not replace notices inside the artifact. If you copied files into your own repository, the header on those files still has to stay.
Is a website notice enough for OGTSL?
No. OGTSL talks about copies. A public attestation page is the honest list for procurement. The condition is met when the notices sit in the material you hand over. Put them in the installer, the about screen, or a licenses file inside the binary, then keep the same texts on the page.
Do transitive OGTSL dependencies count?
Yes. The condition follows the code, not the package you chose by name. If the lockfile pulled in OGTSL transitively and you distribute that tree, those notices travel too. Listing only direct dependencies is how teams miss the duty.
How is OGTSL different from BSD 3-Clause License?
OGTSL asks this: An Artistic-1.0-style license for Open Group conformance suites. Free to run and change, but changed tests must be renamed and the suite itself may not be sold. BSD 3-Clause License asks this: Permissive like MIT, with one extra rule: you may not use the authors' names to promote your product. Notices travel with source and binaries. Open the BSD 3-Clause License page for what that license requires when you ship. Do not treat the SPDX ids as interchangeable because the short names look similar.
Where do I record OGTSL for a buyer?
SourceTrust fetches the published artifact where the suite is distributed as a package, extracts the license files, and compares that text against the declared SPDX id. Test suites are often delivered outside a package registry, so the fetch may find nothing and the component waits for you to paste the text. The license catalog records this license as permissive, so the component page groups it that way. No external obligation exists for the fee rule or the renaming duties, so nothing appears on the project checklist and the reading is yours to do.
Where do I record OGTSL for a buyer?
SourceTrust fetches the published artifact where the suite is distributed as a package, extracts the license files, and compares that text against the declared SPDX id. Test suites are often delivered outside a package registry, so the fetch may find nothing and the component waits for you to paste the text.
The license catalog records this license as permissive, so the component page groups it that way. No external obligation exists for the fee rule or the renaming duties, so nothing appears on the project checklist and the reading is yours to do.
Read /docs/reviewing-component for the review flow.
See also
The hub is the pillar for this cluster. Sibling licenses are the other spokes. Product FAQ links explain how SourceTrust records the duty, not the license text itself.
Practical guidance for procurement review, not legal advice. Confirm high-stakes use with counsel.