5 ms·
Do you have access to the source? Yes? It's open source. Open Source need not be free as in beer, nor as in freedom.
by CorpOverreach 10y ago
Do you have access to the source? Yes? It's open source.
Open Source need not be free as in beer, nor as in freedom.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- detaro 10y agoNo. Call that "source available", "source access" or something, but "Open Source" is pretty much established to be defined by the OSI definition of the term: https://opensource.org/osd https://opensource.org/osd
- idbehold 10y agoThe OSI should trademark the phrase "open source". License it for anyone claiming their software is open source (as defined by OSI), and send cease and desists to anyone who is using the phase incorrectly.
- icebraining 10y agoThey can't: We have discovered that there is virtually no chance that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office would register the mark "open source"; the mark is too descriptive. Ironically, we were partly a victim of our own success in bringing the `open source' concept into the mainstream. https://news.slashdot.org/story/99/06/17/0213251/esr-on-the-open-source-trademark https://news.slashdot.org/story/99/06/17/0213251/esr-on-the-...
- mioelnir 10y ago> ... but "Open Source" is pretty much retconned to be defined by the OSI definition of the term "Open source" as a term or development methodology is older than both the OSI definition and the Debian manual it is based on.