Open Source has nothing to do with Free Software. There is a plenty of OSS produ...

ricardobeat · on Nov 9, 2020

That's not correct, those are not considered OSS.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Open_Source_Definition

andi999 · on Nov 9, 2020

I am not really happy that a string of words which have an understandable meaning ('open' and 'source' leading to 'open source') has been hijacked by some foundation. I mean how would you phrase it if your customer wants to source to be open, but without the freedom of redistribution (because he doesnt want to pay for it).

erinnh · on Nov 9, 2020

It wasnt hijacked, it was invented by them.

Source available is very much a widely accepted moniker for what you describe.

orangeshark · on Nov 9, 2020

Free Software doesn't have to be free to use either (free as in free beer).

erinnh · on Nov 9, 2020

Can you give an example, because Im not sure what you mean exactly.

SomeoneFromCA · on Nov 9, 2020

OpenPose

erinnh · on Nov 9, 2020

Not really open source, though, is it?

justinclift · on Nov 9, 2020

Looking at their GitHub repo, you're right: https://github.com/CMU-Perceptual-Computing-Lab/openpose#lic...

  OpenPose is freely available for free non-commercial use,
  and may be redistributed under these conditions.