Skip to main content
FOSSA Logo
Free License Tool

Is MPL 2.0 compatible with AGPL 3.0?

MPL 2.0-licensed code is conditionally compatible with a AGPL 3.0 project. Here is what that means for your obligations, conflicts, and distribution.

The license of the code you want to use.

The license you are applying to your project.

MPL 2.0AGPL 3.0
Conditional

The short answer

MPL 2.0 is weak copyleft — you must share the source of the specific modified files, but the rest of your project can stay under AGPL 3.0.

Key obligations

Keep the MPL 2.0 code in separate files and provide their source if you distribute.

Potential conflicts

File-level boundaries apply. Strong-copyleft targets may pull in more depending on how the code is linked.

Distribution notes

The larger work can be under AGPL 3.0, but the MPL 2.0 files stay under MPL 2.0.

Stop guessing. Start automating.

Modern applications pull in hundreds of transitive dependencies. A manual check can't keep up.

Disclaimer: This tool offers general guidance based on widely accepted open source community norms and does not constitute legal advice. For commercial use, always consult legal counsel or use a dedicated compliance platform like FOSSA to analyze your specific dependency graph.

What this means in practice

Mozilla Public License 2.0 is a weak copyleft license and GNU AGPL v3.0 is a network copyleft license. Whether you can combine them depends on the details: how the code is linked, whether you modify it, and how you distribute it. Treat the obligations below as a starting point and get legal review before a commercial release.

Compliance checklist for MPL 2.0 AGPL 3.0

  • Keep MPL 2.0 code in clearly separated files or modules.
  • Map which obligations apply to your distribution model (binary, SaaS, or internal).
  • Document the boundary between MPL 2.0 and AGPL 3.0 code.
  • Obtain legal review before a commercial or public release.

About these licenses

Mozilla Public License 2.0

Library

Weak, file-level copyleft. You must share changes to MPL-covered files, but the rest of your project can use another license.

Type
Weak copyleft
Patent grant
Express
Source sharing
Modified files only

GNU AGPL v3.0

Project

Network copyleft. Closes the "SaaS loophole" — offering the software over a network triggers the obligation to share source.

Type
Network copyleft
Patent grant
Express
Source sharing
Combined work + network use

MPL 2.0 and AGPL 3.0: frequently asked questions

Common questions about combining Mozilla Public License 2.0 and GNU AGPL v3.0.

Is MPL 2.0 compatible with AGPL 3.0?

MPL 2.0 is weak copyleft — you must share the source of the specific modified files, but the rest of your project can stay under AGPL 3.0.

Can I use MPL 2.0 code in a AGPL 3.0 SaaS or cloud application?

MPL 2.0 is weak copyleft — you must share the source of the specific modified files, but the rest of your project can stay under AGPL 3.0.

What are my obligations when combining MPL 2.0 and AGPL 3.0?

Keep the MPL 2.0 code in separate files and provide their source if you distribute. The larger work can be under AGPL 3.0, but the MPL 2.0 files stay under MPL 2.0.

Explore related comparisons

Get Started with FOSSA

Start managing your dependencies, licenses, and vulnerabilities today.