Comment by taskforcegemini

The key to open source is the ability to modify it effectively.

To use GPLv3 definitions <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.en.html#section1>:

> The “source code” for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it. “Object code” means any non-source form of a work.

For icons like this, it’s just that there is no object code, the source code is the only form there is.

But supposing you had your SVG document with high precision, meaningful object IDs, Inkscape PowerStroke data (variable stroke thickness, which gets materialised in SVG as a path that gets fill), editor metadata and the likes, and then fed it through svgo and stripped all that stuff out, leaving just the bare bones, the original would be the source code, and the svg output object code.

To put it in the frame of another format where the difference is more stark, if you design something in Photoshop and you export it as PNG but don’t distribute the PSD, that ain’t Open Source. You can modify it, but not properly.

Or another: C, and a compiled binary. You can patch the binary, but that doesn’t make everything open source.

Having the source code available is not open source nor free software.

Open source is a category of licenses.

What you mean is that it is plaintext, and can be introspected. Great for many practical purposes, yes, but in business context, you are obligated to honor the actual license.

If you find a GitHub repository with code inside it and no LICENSE file (or any other license specifier), it is not open source.

maybe if those SVGs are only used as assets inside an iOS/Android app but not on a webpage accessible via browser ....