you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 12 hours ago (6 children)
  • [–] 3 points 11 hours ago* (3 children)
  • [–] 3 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

    No, it's not. It's licenced under the "Source First Licence" which prohibits commercial use, violating the four freedoms and the Open Source Definition.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 11 hours ago (1 child)

    Isn't that the source code in the link above?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 11 hours ago

    It is! Open Source is about more than the source being viewable, it's about ensuring the rights of the user to view, use, modify and redistribute software without impediment. Because this licence puts restrictions on redistribution, it's not an Open Source licence.

    Here is the full Open Source Definition.

    The four freedoms relate to the heavily overlapping concept of Free Software.

  • source
  • parent