Subject to the terms of this license, we grant you a non-transferable, non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free license to access and use the code solely for the purposes of review, compilation and non-commercial distribution.

[–] helpImTrappedOnline@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

In other words, I can't download the code, reskin it and sell "Bob's Voice to Text" for $1.29 on the play store. Seems reasonable to me.

[–] N4CHEM@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

But, if I understand correctly, you cannot create your own fork and modify the code to improve it / alter features. Right? Then it's not FOSS.

[–] helpImTrappedOnline@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Amendment; it seems the other FUTO product has a 10 purchase. So it's not free, but seems to be winrar's approach. "Please pay, but if you don't we won't know"

Assuming my understanding is correct;

By the spirit of the definition, no.

By the literal definition - ~~yes; it's free and the source is open to look at. You could fork it, but you can't sell your own version.~~

No, free in FOSS stands for libre or independent, not the financial definition. Due to the license restrictions, the software is not "free".

I have no idea if you could redistribute a modified version freely without breaching the license terms - enforcement is key. The language could be there just to prevent any of the big tech companies from just forking and profiting from the work.

This is purely speculation, and shouldn't be considered fact.