[nsajko]

Mods, please correct the editorialized and wrong title. NumWorks isn't open source and never was.

What it is is source-available, because the source is available. Or at least it still was available the last time I looked at it.

NumWorks used to be fun because it had an unlocked bootloader, allowing users to download their own software onto the calculator. But then they did a face-heel turn.

To NumWorks' credit, I'm sure the UI is still miles ahead of Texas Instruments calculators.

EDIT: it seems NumWorks now allows users to download "apps" onto their devices. This is nice, of course, but still a far cry from the unlocked bootloader situation.

[rpdillon]

I've engaged in debates on HN about the definition of "open source" in the past, so there might be some disagreement about the meaning of the title.

I've settled on using "OSI open source" to avoid this, since those discussions are uniformly tiring and unproductive.

That said, I agree with parent: the repo specifically has a section regarding copyright and it simply says that all rights are reserved[0]. This is proprietary software, disallowing copying, distribution, and derivative works. It's weird, since even cloning the repo appears to be a violation of their stated terms, though they supply instructions for building the software yourself that of course requires copying the code to your machine first[1].

Copyright is weird.

[0]: https://github.com/numworks/epsilon#copyright

[1]: https://www.numworks.com/resources/engineering/software/buil...

Edit: Figured it out. License was changed 13 months ago: https://github.com/numworks/epsilon/commit/b1ea81f067f5fef3f...

[gpm]

Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer and you should not rely on this as legal advice. Even if I'm right, it would be a stupid and expensive lawsuit.

I think that under US law you can legally clone it from github [1] and build/run it [2] without a license.

[1] GitHub has a valid license to create copies by virtue of their TOS. You aren't creating a copy, github is, and they are then lawfully transferring it to you.

[2] This is explicitly called out as something you can legally do without a license in copyright law. "All rights reserved" is just the lack of a license and doesn't prevent you from doing things that weren't illegal in the first place.: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/117

[rpdillon]

This is a fantastic insight, thank you! I was unaware of this particular limitation on exclusive rights. I'm not a lawyer either, but I agree with your reading: cloning the repo purely to support the build process seems like it's allowed. TIL!

[gigatexal]

To be allowed for use on tests it’s probably setup in such a way and locked down that proctors will allow it’s use.