Regards

Even when a non-obfuscated PHP code is licensed under a stricter license, the code is still open source.

To make this clear, let’s consider Michelangelo’s David (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_(Michelangelo)).

The statue is located in a public museum for everyone’s eyes.
Is the statue naked? I will say yes.

Now the museum that owns the statue license the statue to you as far as the statue is kept in your room for your own eyes only.
Is the statue naked? I will say yes, it is still naked.

So, now change “museum” with “software developer”, “statue” with “code” and “naked” with “open source”. You should get the idea now.

Then how about when someone who make PHP project like me that use stricter contract? Even though they are provided with source code, the developer restricts the client to change the code (which I am still allow it) and to pass it to other parties. So they only have a right to use the software provided as is without any permission to change the source code. When they want to change a feature on the software, they must tell the developer about it and may not change it by them selves. Is this still classified as open source?

Regards and thanks for the answer

… the project will be classified as “open source” project even though I take money from the job I do.

Let me remind you again that being free or open has nothing to do whatsoever with getting money from such software.

If you let your code plainly readable and modifiable, that means that your code is open source already although your code does not conform to the full extent of Open Source Definition. Your code is open, and it is aptly called open source. As I said before, open does not mean free as in freedom since as in your case, you may lose some of the four basic freedoms (http://gnu.org).

So, your project is aptly classified as private open-source software project because the distribution term is very constrained.

As you said before, every programming language that are not encoded / encrypted / protected (such as PHP and Javascript) will be classified as open source when it’s delivered to other users. So that based on what you told me, as I working on my project which are source-visible and not encoded, the project will be classified as “open source” project even though I take money from the job I do.

Now I’m working on my college assignment to search for the definition of open source and proprietary software, then I remembered the definition you told to me before. I also searched from the internet for reliable source and found Open Source Definition here. The first point said:

1. Free Redistribution

The license shall not restrict any party from selling or giving away the software as a component of an aggregate software distribution containing programs from several different sources. The license shall not require a royalty or other fee for such sale.

I think this point is not compatible with the contract that was signed by me and the client. There is a point in the contract defining that the developer must keep the code secret and may not release it to the public. Also there is a point on the contract that define the right of the client to use it and modify the code anytime in the future, however may not redistribute or sell it to other parties, so that the code is not publicly available. That’s now why I think my software cannot be classified as an open source like what you said before, even I let the clients to take away the source code.

What do you think about this? Is my project still classified as open-source project based on the definition from Open Source Definition I found above?

Regards

It is highly recommended that you read the very inspiring book: Free Software, Free Society. It can be downloaded here: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/fsfs/rms-essays.pdf
The book is the first step to understand how we can defend our computing freedoms in this information age.

Finally I really thank you that you put a clear notice for people who will come here in the future so that they won’t be confused.

–
Best regards,
Eus (FSF member #4445)

In this digital era, where computing technology is pervasive, your
freedom depends on the software controlling those computing devices.

Join free software movement today! It is free as in freedom, not as in
free beer!

Join: http://www.fsf.org/jf?referrer=4445

Thanks for your willingness to answer every question that I asked and clarify any mistakes that I made on my article. If I have any more question about open source and free software I will ask you by email, of course if you allow me to do so. As I said before, I will sometimes write a new article that are dedicated to explain about free software and open source (not like this one which the main topic is about MySQL license), and I hope you still want to assist me in case if there are any mistakes, of course I will learn more before write it.

For now, I will place clarification in my post in case if there are any people who come here “by mistake” so they will find better answers from the comment section.

Regards

IMO, MyBB created just another confusion by defining the term “source visible”. Logically, there is no difference between being “open source” and “visible source” because an opened source code is definitely visible and a visible source code needs to be opened first. In other words, that justifies the truth that being open source doesn’t mean having all of the four basic freedoms that are defined in http://gnu.org. This in turn tells us that software that gives its users all of the four basic freedoms should be called “free software” instead of “open source software”. So, having the restriction of removing the creator name, MyBB is still aptly called “open source software”.

For your last paragraph, the PHP scripts are still called “open source” because proprietary software always means “closed source” (c.f., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software#Literal_and_legal_meanings). So, yes, every PHP software that is not encrypted or protected will be called open source software but not proprietary software nor free software. If you understand this, it means that you really understand where free software, open source software and proprietary software stand.

Since long ago, I’ve known the “free” means here like what you said: free as free speech, not as free beer. The confusion here only referred to dual license of MySQL which are GPL and commercial which commercial here means that I must pay for certain condition. And of course I will look for other solutions which are free as “gratis” if I must spend money since I am still a student which don’t want to spend thousands dollar just for a database engine. I’ve got the answer when I asked MySQL staff directly from email 2 days after I wrote this article. I also wrote an article dedicated to the question I asked at http://etersoul.com/2008/10/13/jawaban-mysql-mengenai-lisensi/

And why did I write about source-visible there? Because I found some PHP projects which are not an open source project. One of them was MyBB (MyBulletinBoard) which was a PHP based web forum (now it is an GPL-ed one). They licensed it with their own license which allow anyone to use and modify their software as long as the creator name (MyBB Group) was not removed from the footer. There was also an explanation from the creator which said that the software was a source visible software since it used PHP, but it was not an open-source one since they restricted the user from removing the creator name.

From what I know, until the developer use encryption / protection engine, every software which is developed in PHP will be source-visible (because PHP itself is a scripting language, similiar as JavaScript), even thought it is not intended to be open-source software. This raise a question, is it true what the MyBB developer said? Does that mean every PHP software which is not encrypted or protected will be an open source one since it is source-visible?

Regards