Who owns rclone? Would it be considered proprietary?

I am trying to understand who owns rclone?

Would rclone be considered proprietary? I know the code is open source, and anyone can contribute, but someone ultimately has to approve the commits. So there must be some logic that dictates who owns it.

You can see who is the owner:

License info:

And this, which more specifically indicates who can approve commits etc:

Neither of those speak to the owner. Author does not necessarily mean owner. And copyright/license also doesn't translate to ownership.

I guess what I'm really trying to figure out is, would rclone's encryption format be considered proprietary even though the source code is open source. Everything I know says it would be, but maybe I am wrong.

The author is the owner in this case which is why I shared it.

I'm not sure even he can answer a legal question. You'd probably want to get proper legal advice depending on what you want to do/re-use/etc.

Check the license page as the encryption is part of rclone and part of the license.

1 Like

This is what Bing Chat says which I think is a pretty good answer

Q: Is open source software proprietry?

No, open source software is not proprietary. Open source software is software developed and maintained via open collaboration, and made available, typically at no cost, for anyone to use, examine, alter and redistribute however they like. Proprietary software, on the other hand, is software that is owned by its original creator and licensed to users under certain terms and conditions that usually restrict its modification and distribution. For example, Microsoft 365 is a proprietary software suite that requires a subscription fee to use, while LibreOffice is an open source software suite that is free to download and modify.

1 Like

I didn't think of that. Thanks. Works for me!

This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.