Software Licensing in Ukraine: How to Avoid Infringement and Protect Your Rights

The Legal Status of Software in Ukraine

Under Ukrainian law, software is protected as an object of copyright. Article 20 of the Law of Ukraine “On Copyright and Related Rights” (No. 2811-IX, as amended through 12 December 2025) specifically governs copyright in computer programs: protection extends to programs expressed in source or object code, provided they are original. Computer programs are protected in the same way as literary works. This means that source code – regardless of programming language or form of expression – receives legal protection automatically from the moment of creation, without any registration requirement.

Copyright protects the expression of an idea, not the idea itself. Algorithms, methods, and operating principles may be freely used by other developers. Copying code without the rights holder’s permission, however, constitutes infringement.

📋  For foreign businesses:  Ukraine is a signatory to the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, which provides automatic mutual copyright recognition among more than 180 member states. Software created in any Berne country is protected in Ukraine without registration – and vice versa.

Types of Software Licences

Understanding the distinction between licence types is the starting point for any compliance programme.

Proprietary Licences

Proprietary software is distributed under commercial terms with restrictions on use, modification, and distribution. Typical conditions include: limits on the number of users or devices; prohibition of decompilation and reverse engineering; territorial restrictions; and time limitations (subscription or perpetual licence). Common licensing models include per-seat licences, enterprise licences, OEM licences, and cloud subscriptions (SaaS).

Open Source Licences

Copyleft licences (GPL, agpl) require that modified software be distributed under the same licence, preserving the open nature of the code in all derivative works.

Permissive licences (MIT, Apache, bsd) permit code use in proprietary products with minimal restrictions – typically requiring only that the original copyright notice be preserved.

Weak copyleft licences (LGPL, MPL) allow combining open source code with proprietary code under certain conditions, such as dynamic linking of libraries.

Type	Examples	Redistribution	Use in proprietary products
Copyleft	GPL, agpl	Under same licence	Generally not permitted
Weak copyleft	LGPL, MPL	Component under same licence	Permitted under conditions
Permissive	MIT, Apache, bsd	Any licence	Permitted
Proprietary	Microsoft, Adobe	Not permitted	Per licence terms

⚠️  The GPL trap:  Incorporating GPL-licensed code into a commercial product may require you to make the entire product’s source code publicly available. Always verify the licence of every open source component before including it in your codebase.

Key Business Considerations

Software Audit and Inventory

Every organisation should conduct regular inventories of all software in use. This means documenting every licence – its validity period, permitted number of users, and terms of use. The absence of proper records is itself a compliance risk: it leads to inadvertent violations and exposes the organisation to civil claims and significant court-awarded compensation during regulatory inspections or due diligence reviews.

Compliance in Software Development

When building software products, tracking the licences of all components used is essential. It is advisable to implement licence verification procedures at the stage of selecting libraries and frameworks, rather than addressing licence conflicts after development is complete.

Risk Management

Licence violations can result in civil claims, injunctions requiring cessation of software use, and court-ordered compensation. Under Article 52(2) of Law No. 2811-IX “On Copyright and Related Rights”, a Ukrainian court may award compensation in lieu of damages – calculated as a lump sum equal to double, or in cases of intentional infringement triple, the fee that would have been payable had the infringer sought a licence. Courts may additionally order confiscation of infringing materials and equipment used to produce them.

⚠️  Due diligence note:  Acquiring a business or investing in a software company requires a thorough IP audit. Undisclosed licence violations – particularly GPL compliance issues – can constitute material liabilities that affect valuation and deal structure.

Protecting Your Own Software

Documenting Authorship

Record the development process through version control systems, internal documentation, and business correspondence. In the event of a dispute, this documentation establishes authorship and the timeline of creation. Depositing source code with a specialised organisation creates additional evidence of the creation date – particularly useful in cross-border disputes where foreign courts may require formal proof.

Choosing the Right Licensing Model

The licensing model should align with the business strategy. Proprietary licences are appropriate for maximising revenue from unique software products. Open source licences – particularly dual licensing arrangements for commercial clients – can be effective for accelerating adoption and building an ecosystem around a product.

Licence Agreements

A well-drafted licence agreement should address: the scope of rights granted; territory and term of use; restrictions and prohibitions; technical support terms; liability of the parties; and dispute resolution – including choice of law and jurisdiction clauses, which are particularly important in cross-border arrangements.

Practical Recommendations

For Software Users

• Always read and retain licence agreements – including EULAs and open source notices.
• Do not exceed permitted installation limits. Per-seat and per-device restrictions are actively enforced.
• Verify commercial use permissions before deploying “free” software in a business context. Many licences permit only non-commercial use.
• Maintain a centralised licence register, including expiry dates, renewal obligations, and responsible owners.

For Developers

• Use automated licence scanning tools integrated into your development workflow to detect licence conflicts early.
• Establish an open source policy that defines which licence types are approved for use in your products.
• Train your development team on licensing basics – particularly the distinction between copyleft and permissive licences.
• Define IP ownership clearly in contractor agreements. Without an explicit assignment clause, copyright in works created by a contractor may remain with the contractor.

International Aspects

For businesses operating across borders, software licensing requires attention to several additional dimensions. While the Berne Convention ensures baseline copyright protection in member states, enforcement standards, available remedies, and the treatment of specific licensing arrangements vary significantly between jurisdictions.

Cross-border licence agreements should address: the governing law and jurisdiction; export control regulations that may apply to certain software categories; tax implications of international royalty payments; and data localisation requirements where software processes personal data.

📋  Ukraine and international IP frameworks:  Ukraine is a party to the Berne Convention, the trips Agreement (as a wto member), and the WIPO Copyright Treaty. Rights holders in member states benefit from automatic protection in Ukraine without registration. Enforcement through Ukrainian courts and customs authorities is available to foreign rights holders on the same terms as domestic rights holders.

Emerging Challenges

Artificial Intelligence and Code Generation

AI development tools create new and unresolved licensing questions. The use of copyright-protected code to train AI models, and the legal status of AI-generated code, remain active areas of legal uncertainty. Companies using AI tools for code generation should exercise caution: the provenance of generated output may be difficult to verify, and the legal framework in most jurisdictions – including Ukraine – has not yet fully addressed these questions.

Cloud Computing and SaaS

Cloud technologies are transforming traditional licensing models. The SaaS model transfers many compliance obligations to the service provider – but introduces new risks around data confidentiality, data residency, and vendor lock-in. Organisations must review Service Level Agreements and data processing agreements with particular care, especially where Ukrainian personal data protection requirements apply.

Conclusion

Proper software licensing is not a legal formality – it is a strategic instrument for intellectual property protection and business risk management. Investment in understanding and adhering to licensing requirements pays off through the avoidance of litigation, court-ordered compensation, and reputational damage.

The core principles of sound licence management are proactivity, documentation, regular audit, and staff training. In an era of digital transformation, these competencies have become critical to business competitiveness – and to the ability to operate confidently across jurisdictions.

Given the pace of technological change and the continuing evolution of legal frameworks, organisations should review their licensing policies regularly and engage specialist IP counsel for complex matters.