5 ms·

Unfortunately, Apple's own App Store Terms of Service don't allow use of GPL software on iOS. https://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/more-about-the-app-store-gpl-

Unfortunately, Apple's own App Store Terms of Service don't allow use of GPL software on iOS. https://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/more-about-the-app-store-gpl-enforcement https://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/more-about-the-app-store...

jgord 10y ago
wow.. that seems unduly aggressive and unnecessary, almost spiteful. If its not illegal, then perhaps it should be.
Dylan16807 10y ago
Yes, that's obnoxious, but you can use MIT or dual license.
josephg 10y ago
I'm confused. I use dozens of iOS apps which are built on react-native (BSD). Signal messenger (which I use daily) is GPLv3 licensed. And I don't know about the client code but I bet 95% of the apps I use depend on GPL code on the servers which power them. The majority of Apple's stack is opensource, too. Take a look through http://opensource.apple.com/ http://opensource.apple.com/ some time. The kernel and huge swathes of their ecosystem are opensource. I'm writing this comment in chrome, which has millions of lines of opensourced webkit code in it, written by paid Apple engineers. And compiled in clang/llvm, which is developed, maintained by Apple. Oh, and its opensource too. I'm totally confused by the argument that Apple hates opensource. They depend on it. They give back. They're a good citizen. They just aren't huge fans of the GPL, but so what? Neither am I. Neither is Rust (MIT), or Golang (BSD) or the NodeJS community (90%+ BSD/ISC). Opensource simply doesn't need the GPL to bloom in today's world.
- swhipple 10y ago
  While open source software and free software refer to roughly the same set of software, the ideology is different. Open source is about collaboratively building tools for developers and businesses, or simply because collaboration produces better software. The software is often released under permissive terms. Apple participates in open source projects. Free software is focused on the end user having freedom over their software by ensuring that they have the ability to read, modify, and redistribute it. Apple does not give these rights to users of their platforms. The post that was linked was the FSF, which argues from the free software perspective.
- JohnTHaller 10y ago
  Anything GPL licensed that is on the iOS App Store is in violation of the GPL unless they own the copyright to all of the code in the app and are effectively dual licensing it. That's the way it's been explained to me due to the restrictive way that the App Store agreement is structured (more restrictively than the Play Store, Amazon App Store, etc).
Turing_Machine 10y ago
"GPL" and "Free Software" are not the same thing. Not even the FSF claims that. https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#GPLCompati... Note that the BSD license, Apache license, MIT license (which the FSF calls the X11 license), etc. are all considered Free Software licenses by the FSF and are okay in the App Store.

jgord 10y ago

wow.. that seems unduly aggressive and unnecessary, almost spiteful. If its not illegal, then perhaps it should be.

Dylan16807 10y ago

Yes, that's obnoxious, but you can use MIT or dual license.

josephg 10y ago

I'm confused. I use dozens of iOS apps which are built on react-native (BSD). Signal messenger (which I use daily) is GPLv3 licensed. And I don't know about the client code but I bet 95% of the apps I use depend on GPL code on the servers which power them. The majority of Apple's stack is opensource, too. Take a look through http://opensource.apple.com/ http://opensource.apple.com/ some time. The kernel and huge swathes of their ecosystem are opensource. I'm writing this comment in chrome, which has millions of lines of opensourced webkit code in it, written by paid Apple engineers. And compiled in clang/llvm, which is developed, maintained by Apple. Oh, and its opensource too. I'm totally confused by the argument that Apple hates opensource. They depend on it. They give back. They're a good citizen. They just aren't huge fans of the GPL, but so what? Neither am I. Neither is Rust (MIT), or Golang (BSD) or the NodeJS community (90%+ BSD/ISC). Opensource simply doesn't need the GPL to bloom in today's world.

swhipple 10y ago
While open source software and free software refer to roughly the same set of software, the ideology is different. Open source is about collaboratively building tools for developers and businesses, or simply because collaboration produces better software. The software is often released under permissive terms. Apple participates in open source projects. Free software is focused on the end user having freedom over their software by ensuring that they have the ability to read, modify, and redistribute it. Apple does not give these rights to users of their platforms. The post that was linked was the FSF, which argues from the free software perspective.
JohnTHaller 10y ago
Anything GPL licensed that is on the iOS App Store is in violation of the GPL unless they own the copyright to all of the code in the app and are effectively dual licensing it. That's the way it's been explained to me due to the restrictive way that the App Store agreement is structured (more restrictively than the Play Store, Amazon App Store, etc).

Turing_Machine 10y ago

"GPL" and "Free Software" are not the same thing. Not even the FSF claims that. https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#GPLCompati... Note that the BSD license, Apache license, MIT license (which the FSF calls the X11 license), etc. are all considered Free Software licenses by the FSF and are okay in the App Store.