iTechGuides is reader-supported. When you buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. Learn more
Publishing source code does not automatically make software open source. The license determines what people may do with that code. In its August 15, 2024, issue, Bytes describes Fair Source Software as publicly available code licensed with restrictions intended to protect the producer’s business model, with a transition to an open-source license after a period of time.
What does “Fair Source” mean?
Bytes #314 presents Fair Source as a category between conventional open source and closed source. Its summary of the official Fair Source guidelines identifies three criteria: the source code is publicly available, the license protects the producer’s business model, and the project transitions to an open-source license after a period of time.
That is the newsletter’s summary, not a replacement for the license itself. The exact permissions, restrictions, and transition terms depend on the wording that applies to a particular project. The issue does not establish the current specification or the terms of any current project license.
Recommended Free Tools
Is publicly available code open source?
Not necessarily. Source availability answers whether people can see the code; a license answers what they are allowed to do with it. A project can publish its source on a public code-hosting site while restricting certain uses through its license. Public visibility alone does not establish that users have the freedoms associated with open-source software.
#1 Best Overall
For someone evaluating a project, the practical question is not just “Can I read the code?” but also “Can I use, modify, distribute, or build a competing product from it under these terms?” Check the project’s current license text for those answers.
How does Fair Source compare with open and closed source?
The terms can describe different combinations of visibility and permission. The table reflects the distinctions in Bytes #314’s explanation; it is not a substitute for reviewing a specific license.
| Question | Fair Source as described by Bytes | Open source | Closed source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the source available? | Yes, publicly available. | Source is available under an open-source license. | Source is generally not made publicly available. |
| What uses does the license permit? | Some restrictions may apply to protect the producer’s business model; the exact terms depend on the license. | Uses are governed by the applicable open-source license. | Access and use are governed by the applicable terms, typically without public source access. |
| Can commercial competition be restricted? | The category may include restrictions such as a non-compete clause; check the actual license. | Not established for every license by the newsletter’s summary; check the actual license. | Public rights to use the source are generally not granted. |
| Are community contributions invited? | Bytes frames public code and community contributions as compatible with the model; contribution terms still depend on the project. | Contribution practices vary by project. | Public contribution is generally not available when the source is not public. |
| Does the license change over time? | Bytes’ summary says it transitions to an open-source license after a period of time; the timing and terms are project-specific. | No transition is implied by the term itself. | No transition is implied by the term itself. |
Why would a company choose this model?
Fair Source is presented as a way to share code and invite community participation while retaining restrictions intended to protect a business model. That can be a trade-off: users may be able to inspect the software or contribute, but those who need unrestricted rights—particularly for commercial use or competing products—must confirm that the license permits their intended use.
Bytes uses Sentry and Codecov as an example. The issue says Sentry added protections after another company used Codecov software to create a competing product, and frames that account as motivation for a license category that can preserve public code while allowing restrictions such as a non-compete clause. This is the newsletter’s account and framing, not independent verification of the underlying dispute.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.How to assess a Fair Source project
- Open the project’s current license. Do not infer permissions from a public repository or from a “Fair Source” label.
- Check the uses that matter to you. Look for terms on commercial use, redistribution, modification, and competing products.
- Find the transition provision. If the license is scheduled to change, identify when the change occurs and which open-source license will apply. Do not assume a timeline or destination that the project has not stated.
- Review contribution terms separately. Public source does not by itself explain how contributions are accepted or licensed.
Bytes #314 was published on August 15, 2024. It does not establish current Fair Source license versions, project adoption, or the present terms of any named project. For a decision today, rely on the project’s current license and its official licensing guidance.
Quick Recap
Best Value
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
