logoalt Hacker News

kennywinkertoday at 8:00 AM2 repliesview on HN

> (2) “Operating system provider” does not mean a person or entity that distributes an operating system or application under license terms that permit a recipient to copy, redistribute, and modify the software.

Where does MacOS and iOS fit then? The core of both those operating systems (darwin) is open source (APSL licensed).


Replies

w10-1today at 8:25 AM

> copy, redistribute, and modify the software

I can copy and redistribute macOS binaries, and I can write programs/extensions that modify macOS.

These vague terms show that legislators are incapable of regulating software effectively; but they do create an enduring legal franchise to deal with their confusion.

show 2 replies
gmueckltoday at 8:11 AM

MacOS isn't Darwin and comes under terms that do not fit rhe criteria of the exception. Apple actually did go to some lengths in the past to ensure that all layers of MacOS contained bits that they could claim restrictive licenses on.

A project like PureDarwin, however, can be freely distributed because it omits Apple's proprietary parts.

show 1 reply