Not financially free but free as in freedom. Although most foss does not need to be bought, but there are foss programs you have to buy and after you bought it you are free to do with it what you want.
Although this depends on the licence and copyright. For example you can fork the code and resell it (under certain licences) but due to copyright you can not use certain things such as graphics, fonts and name (depending on their licence).
Graphics font and name fall under trademark I believe, which separates it from copyright.
Firefox is a famous example of this. The code for Firefox is completely open to anyone to fork and reuse, but you cannot call your fork Firefox. Mozilla retains the brand and the logo for it.
Ya’ll in this comment section are making things more confusing somehow.
Free Open Source Software:
Is Free; available without purchase
Is Open Source; the source code is available to study and fork
Is Software; A series of intangible instructions that run through a compute module
Do correct me if I’m wrong, because I’ve just ripped these from other comments in this thread that have been disputed unclearly.
Wrong definition of “free,” and funnily enough this is where the ensuing comments section confusion starts.
Not financially free but free as in freedom. Although most foss does not need to be bought, but there are foss programs you have to buy and after you bought it you are free to do with it what you want. Although this depends on the licence and copyright. For example you can fork the code and resell it (under certain licences) but due to copyright you can not use certain things such as graphics, fonts and name (depending on their licence).
Graphics font and name fall under trademark I believe, which separates it from copyright.
Firefox is a famous example of this. The code for Firefox is completely open to anyone to fork and reuse, but you cannot call your fork Firefox. Mozilla retains the brand and the logo for it.
So instead we get iceweasel.