Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Sorry to nitpick but MIT/BSD licensed software is free in the FSF/GPL sense. To be free software, you have to respect freedoms 0-3 as defined here: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html . This is the case for MIT/BSD licensed software and both those licenses are considered acceptable free software licenses by the FSF.

The cheklist for Open Source software can be found here: http://opensource.org/docs/osd. They are slightly different but in practice, most (if not all) free software licenses are also open source licenses and vice versa.

Stallman's definition of 'free software' isn't authoritative, lots of people have other definitions, and Stallman is quite explicit on trying to change definitions to suit him.

Thanks for clarification. I thought that since MIT/BSD does not enforce source disclosure, users don't have the "freedom to change the software" according to GPL parlance.

Applications are open for YC Winter 2020

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact