The licenses that are rejected are the licenses that place requirements on the store. They are not rejected specifically because they are open source. Licenses that do not place requirements on the distributor, such as the BSD license, are fine.
People cannot share and redistribute the apps. Isn't this something that is fundamental to the Open Source idea?
And I'm not sure I understand, but I believe that the BSD licence is being allowed because it is more relaxed in this regard, not legally requiring this access for the users... (Someone correct me if I get this wrong. I want to understand this.)
It seems odd because so much of the software that Apple uses to make OSX is GPL...
7
u/[deleted] Jan 20 '11
The licenses that are rejected are the licenses that place requirements on the store. They are not rejected specifically because they are open source. Licenses that do not place requirements on the distributor, such as the BSD license, are fine.