Apple does not, but the GPL does.
Edit: I ask because I’m curious to learn and because many systems run apps that are GPL without the whole system being GPL. For example, I love using GIMP on Windows.
> You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein.
This conflicts with the App Store's Terms of Service, particularly it's "Usage Rules". https://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/more-about-the-app-store...
This is of course different from merely running GPL software on a proprietary OS. In fact, iOS ships with GPL software on board.
Not sure this Stack Overflow is current/correct, but it appears other FOSS licenses might be compatible with iOS App Store terms. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/459833/which-open-source...
If you write entirely your own code, and include only more freely licensed dependencies, you can release your own code under the GPL and still distribute it on the App Store.
Eric Raymond explained why: use value. Open systems can be exploited easily and the people who use them get high use value because of all that.
Incentives to port and build on known open systems are stronger, barriers to access lower.
Result: more FOSS on said system
I remember the days of very little Apple compatible software on the shelf at retailers, and no games. I was probably one of the first students to use a MacBook with OSX for CSCI 101 because many classes required Windows. That was lack of freedom. The App Store has more software than any other distribution channel at any point in my life.
Edit: I also love freedom from malware, which I understand is probably a temporary situation. But it’s been a good run so far.