alt Hacker NewsOpen source was never about doing stuff for free - at least not originally.
It’s about the definition of ownership. What does it mean to own a program?
When you distribute the program, you must also distribute the code for it. That’s open source.
Open source was never about doing stuff for free - at least not originally.
It’s about the definition of ownership. What does it mean to own a program?
When you distribute the program, you must also distribute the code for it. That’s open source.
It's not about the definition of ownership, either. The author of FOSS software retains ownership, unless they explicitly convey it to someone else.
It's about how software is licensed--the terms and conditions under which someone can make a copy. That's why it's called the GNU Public License, or the MIT License, and why there's a LICENSE file.
The mere act of copying does not convey ownership, and never has.