|
|
|
|
|
|
by rpdillon
1395 days ago
|
|
|
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... |
|
|
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