In the last years, I have seen plenty of users telling or promoting certain ultra-permissive rules as part of Open Source but which are not even in the definition like the use of read-only licenses, being a good example the MEGA software.
However, I didn’t find exact source of these ideas and only believed in the misinformation of certain videos in *tube or similar.
Today, I was looking for a FLOSS VPN client to use at home as I use MATE DE and found Printunl Client promoted as Open Source. Or that was everything until I read the license.
I think projects would be better since they can change licenses at any moment or use custom ones as this case.
Is that, and also that main licenses are already listed in GNU and Open Source websites.
agreed. especially since most end users don’t pay attention to things like license updates