4 ms·
No, open source means the license meets the OSI definition of open source, which CC NC doesn't.
by beojan 8y ago
No, open source means the license meets the OSI definition of open source, which CC NC doesn't.
- jexah 8y agoopensource.com would beg to differ. I suppose it depends on where one gets their definition from.
- n_jd 8y agoCC NC forbids using the material for commercial purposes [1]. On 'use', opensource.com defers to the four freedoms [2], which includes the freedom to use software for whatever you like. So by opensource.com, software licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 is not open source. Also they don't mention creative commons when discussing open source licenses [5] because it doesn't make sense for code. I can see why you might think opensource.com says that open source "literally means the source is public" if you only read the first sentence in their defining article [3]. Fair enough, this is a common misunderstanding [4]. [1] - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ [2] - https://opensource.com/law/10/10/license-compliance-not-problem-open-source-users https://opensource.com/law/10/10/license-compliance-not-prob... [3] - https://opensource.com/resources/what-open-source https://opensource.com/resources/what-open-source [4] - https://www.forbes.com/sites/wenjiazhao/2012/07/06/beliefs-and-misbeliefs-on-open-source-software/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/wenjiazhao/2012/07/06/beliefs-a... [5] - https://opensource.com/law/13/1/which-open-source-software-license-should-i-use https://opensource.com/law/13/1/which-open-source-software-l...