Yes — but the combined work must be released under the more restrictive license.
Mozilla Public License 2.0 is a file-level (or library-level) copyleft license. You can include Mozilla Public License 2.0 files in a BSD 3-Clause License project; the Mozilla Public License 2.0 files retain their copyleft obligation (changes must be released), while the project at large can stay BSD 3-Clause License. Keep file boundaries clear.
| License | Family | Patent grant |
|---|---|---|
| Mozilla Public License 2.0 (MPL-2.0) | weak-copyleft | Yes |
| BSD 3-Clause License (BSD-3-Clause) | permissive | No (implicit at most) |
Mozilla Public License 2.0: File-level copyleft: modifications to MPL files must be MPL, but linking with non-MPL code is fine.
BSD 3-Clause License: Three-clause BSD: like 2-clause plus a no-endorsement clause.
If you found this page because you're trying to figure out whether shipping a particular dependency is safe, the answer above is a starting point — not a substitute for reading the actual licenses or talking to a lawyer when stakes are high.
LicenseHound walks every transitive dependency in your repo, maps each to its SPDX license, and flags pairs like this one in PR comments. The CLI is free; the team dashboard is paid.