MIT vs Apache 2.0: what is the difference?

Short answer: MIT: commercial use, modification, redistribution: Yes. Apache 2.0: same uses: Yes.

Both are permissive open-source licenses that allow commercial use, modification and redistribution.

MIT: commercial use, modification, redistribution: Yes

License: MIT License (MIT, curated)

• Every use you described is granted by MIT, and nothing you described is prohibited.

Duties: attribution, license_notice

Apache 2.0: same uses: Yes

License: Apache License 2.0 (Apache-2.0, curated)

• Every use you described is granted by Apache 2.0, and nothing you described is prohibited.

Duties: attribution, license_notice, state_changes

Duties and notes compared

• MIT: duties attribution, license_notice. Provided as is, without warranty.
• Apache-2.0: duties attribution, license_notice, state_changes. Includes an express patent license that ends for anyone who sues over patents in the work (section 3). Does not grant rights to the licensor's trademarks (section 6).

Combined in one work: compatible.

Context

• The duties differ: compare the duties and notes listed for each license below.

Sources

• MIT (SPDX)
• Apache License 2.0

Check it yourself (free, no key)

{
  "tool": "check_license",
  "arguments": {
    "license": "MIT",
    "intended_use": {
      "commercial_use": true,
      "modification": true,
      "redistribution": true
    }
  }
}

Computed from Rightshold's license profiles; not legal advice. Updated 2026-10-19. JSON · Markdown