this post was submitted on 12 Feb 2022
2 points (100.0% liked)

Open Source

30339 readers
2723 users here now

All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!

Useful Links

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Fisch@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

That's why Android isn't FOSS, it lacks the free part

[–] Yujiri@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The term "free software" as used in FOSS doesn't mean software that promotes freedom, but software whose licenses allow certain freedoms. In this definition, Android is free software and FOSS.

[–] Fisch@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)
[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago

Android Open Source Project (AOSP) is FOSS, but it is not copyleft - almost everything in AOSP (aside from the Linux kernel, which is copyleft under GPLv2) is licensed under "permissive" FOSS licenses which allow anyone to take it, change it, and distribute non-free derivatives.

The Android that comes on a phone you buy in the store is (with very few exceptions) largely not FOSS - it is a bunch of closed source proprietary bits running on top of something derived from AOSP. On some phones it is relatively easy to replace the Android it came with with a version that is mostly FOSS, but on many phones it is not.

In theory, the fact that Android distributors are required to make their changes to the kernel itself available (because it is copyleft) should make it easier for people to make FOSS operating systems (Android or otherwise) for these phones, but, for a variety of reasons, in practice it often doesn't work out that way.