cgpl.org and fcl.dev are both overseas legal and are often compared head-to-head. This page lines them up item by item — rating, price, China accessibility, HQ, payments and refund policy — and ends with practical "which to pick" guidance.
On balance, fcl.dev comes out slightly ahead — it offers Higher overall rating (6.0 vs 5.0). That said, cgpl.org has its strengths too: Close to its rival on most dimensions — little to separate them. If that matters more to you, cgpl.org is well worth considering.
| Comparison | cgpl.org | fcl.dev |
|---|---|---|
| Category | 📦 legal 开源许可证 |
📦 legal 软件许可 |
| Overall rating | 5.0/10 | 6.0/10 |
| Monthly price | N/A | N/A |
| Yearly price | — | — |
| China access | ★★★ Direct access |
★★★ Direct access |
| HQ | Unknown | United States |
| Network | — | — |
| Payment methods | — | — |
| Refund guarantee | — | — |
| Editor notes | 可研究小众开源许可证，实用性有限。 |
了解Fair Source许可模式有参考价值。 |
| Data source | In-depth review | In-depth review |
The guidance above is auto-compiled by TG4G from public data and is not purchase advice. Always rely on the official site and your own testing. A green cell marks the better value on that dimension (higher rating / CN / refund, or lower price). Some links are affiliate links (rel="sponsored nofollow").
If you want all-round balance and reputation, choose fcl.dev; if your core need happens to be cgpl.org's strength (Close to its rival on most dimensions — little to separate them), then cgpl.org is the better fit. Either way, trial the cheapest plan for a week before committing long-term.
This page is a side-by-side reference, not purchase advice; prices and policies are per the official sites, and some links are affiliate.