Creating proprietary modifications to MIT license ThemeWagon Si-Education Next.js Template Source Code
1. Keep MIT license for the original template
Keep the original template’s copyright notice and MIT license text intact.
Place it in
/public/LICENSE_TEMPLATE.txt(or keep in README if you prefer) so it is part of the deployed site.In your footer attribution, you can say something like:
“Template adapted from Si Education by GetNextJs Templates.com (MIT License)”
This makes it explicit that MIT applies only to the original template code.
2. Add your own copyright for your modifications
At the top of files you modify (or in a separate
LICENSE_MYCODE.txt), include something like:
/*
Copyright © 2026 Ravi S. Iyer
All rights reserved. Proprietary code.
This work includes modifications, additions, and extensions to the
Si Education template (MIT License), which are copyright of GetNextJs Templates.com.
*/
Or, if you prefer a separate file:
LICENSE_MYCODE.txt
Copyright © 2026 Ravi S. Iyer
All rights reserved.
The code in this repository includes modifications, extensions, and new components
that are proprietary to me.
The original template code from Si Education (GetNextJs Templates.com) remains
under the MIT License (see LICENSE_TEMPLATE.txt).
3. How to handle deployment
Keep footer attribution as before.
Optionally, in an “About / Credits” page, include:
Original template MIT license
Statement about your proprietary modifications
This makes the distinction very clear to any user or auditor.
4. Why this works
MIT license does not restrict you from adding your own proprietary code.
You are not relicensing the MIT code — you are only making your modifications proprietary.
You are maintaining the required attribution for MIT-covered code.
Industry practice often calls this a “dual copyright notice”: MIT for the original, proprietary for your additions.
5. Optional extra clarity
In your README.md you can summarize:
This project uses the “Si Education” Next.js template (MIT License) as a base.
All modifications, additions, and new components created for this school website
are copyright © 2026 Ravi S. Iyer and are proprietary.
This makes it legally unambiguous.
✅ Bottom line: You can safely:
Keep the template under MIT
Retain your modifications as proprietary
Comply fully with MIT by attributing the template correctly
This is a well-established, professional approach in real-world projects.
If you want, I can draft a ready-to-deploy footer + LICENSE section that clearly separates MIT code from your proprietary additions — so you can just drop it in your Next.js + GHP site. Do you want me to do that?
This is very common in industry: the footer has a short link, and the detailed copyright & license info is on a separate page.
How you can structure it
1. Footer (short link only)
<footer class="text-center text-sm mt-8">
<a href="/about#copyright">Copyright Info</a>
</footer>
Keeps the footer clean and minimal
Users can click to view full details
2. About page (or a separate Credits/Copyright page)
[Note: (MIT License) part of line below broken to avoid horizontal scroll bar.]
<section id="copyright">
<h2>Copyright & Licensing</h2>
<p>
Template adapted from <strong>Si Education</strong> by GetNextJs Templates.com (MIT License).<br>
Modifications and additional code copyright © 2026 Ravi S. Iyer. All rights reserved.
</p>
</section>
Clearly separates MIT template from your proprietary modifications
Fully compliant with MIT requirements
Makes it easy for any auditor, developer, or curious user to see provenance
Benefits of this approach
Footer stays minimal — looks professional and uncluttered.
Legal clarity — both points are explicit and unambiguous.
Flexible for future updates — if you add more proprietary modules, just update the About section, not the footer.
Industry standard — many websites do exactly this with licenses, privacy statements, terms, etc.
Optional polish
You could even include links for both template license and your proprietary notice:
<p>
Template adapted from <a href="/about#template-license">Si Education (MIT License)</a>.<br>
Modifications copyright © 2026 Ravi S. Iyer. All rights reserved.
</p>
Makes the MIT license text directly accessible
Users can see full license without leaving your site
So yes — your idea of a “Copyright Info” footer link pointing to a section with both statements is perfect, professional, and fully compliant.
...
Me: Great. And having a Footer Copyright link like above, will satisfy MIT license requirements, I presume?
CG: Yes — absolutely.
Here’s why your “Copyright Info” footer link” approach fully satisfies MIT requirements:
MIT requirement in plain terms
The MIT license says (key part):
“The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.”
Breaking it down:
You are distributing the template code as part of your site (even if modified).
MIT only requires that the copyright notice and license of the original template be included in the distributed version.
How your approach satisfies it
The footer link is visible on all pages.
Clicking the link takes the user to a page or section that contains:
“Template adapted from Si Education by GetNextJs Templates.com (MIT License).”
This counts as including the copyright and license with the distributed work.
Additional benefits
You also explicitly state your proprietary modifications — good for legal clarity.
The footer link keeps the UI clean while still being legally compliant.
This is industry-standard practice: many open-source projects do exactly this.
✅ Bottom line
Footer link → points to full attribution & MIT notice → compliant
You don’t need to put the full MIT text in the footer itself
Keeping your own copyright for modifications separate is also perfectly fine
...
Here is the reasoning, broken down clearly.
1. From a client-trust and professional standpoint
Providing the source code:
Eliminates vendor lock-in
Signals confidence in your work
Builds long-term trust (especially important for a school client)
Aligns with common expectations in custom web development contracts
For institutional clients (schools, NGOs, temples, small orgs), dependency on the developer is often seen as a risk. Your approach avoids that entirely.
2. From a legal and licensing standpoint
(a) MIT template code
You must allow redistribution of the MIT-licensed portions anyway.
So withholding source would be artificial, not legally necessary.
(b) Your proprietary modifications
You are allowed to:
Copyright them
License them to customer A
Providing source code does not mean giving up ownership.
Ownership ≠ access.
You retain copyright unless you explicitly assign it.
3. The correct framing (this is key)
What you are really giving customer A is:
A license to use, modify, and deploy the code for their own site
—not ownership of your intellectual property unless agreed.
This can be as simple as a short clause or README note.
4. Best-practice recommendation (simple and clean)
When you hand over the source code, include:
1. LICENSE-MIT.txt
For the base template (unchanged)
2. README.md or LICENSE-PROPRIETARY.txt
Something like:
Portions of this project are based on the “Si Education” template, licensed under the MIT License.
Modifications, additional components, configuration, and custom logic are
Copyright © 2026 Ravi S. Iyer.Customer A is granted a non-exclusive, perpetual license to use, modify, and deploy this code for their own website and related applications.
That’s it. No legal overkill.
5. Practical advantage for you
This approach also protects you:
Fewer future “urgent support” expectations
Clear boundary between delivery and ongoing maintenance
If they come back later, it’s a new engagement, not an obligation
6. Verdict
✔ Yes, you are thinking correctly
✔ This is aligned with open-source ethics
✔ It improves client confidence
✔ It does not weaken your IP position
✔ It fits well with your MIT + proprietary split
...
1. Meaning of non-exclusive
Non-exclusive means:
You retain full ownership of the code.
You are free to:
Reuse the same code
Adapt it
Sell or license it to other customers
Customer A does not get exclusivity over your work.
Without this word, a client could later argue (even if wrongly) that they believed they had exclusive rights and that you reused “their” solution elsewhere. Non-exclusive shuts that door completely.
In short:
Customer A can use it, but they don’t own it and can’t block you from reusing it.
2. Meaning of perpetual
Perpetual means:
The license does not expire
Customer A can keep using the code indefinitely
You cannot later revoke usage as long as they comply with the license
This is important because:
Schools and institutions dislike time-bound rights
It reassures them they are safe long-term
It avoids future disputes like “Can we still use this site after 5 years?”
In short:
Once granted, they can keep using it forever.
...
Comments
Post a Comment