mediumMultiple Select
FC0-U71 Practice Question: Which TWO of the following are examples of…
Which TWO of the following are examples of open-source software licenses?
⚠ Common exam trap
Watch out — candidates often confuse proprietary licenses (like EULAs) with open-source licenses, or think that any license that allows free download is open-source, ignoring the specific grant of modification and redistribution rights.
Answer choices
Why each option matters
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
GNU GPL
The GNU GPL (B) is a canonical open-source license: it grants users the freedom to run, study, share, and modify the software, and its copyleft provision requires derivative works to be distributed under the same license terms. The MIT License (C) is also a permissive open-source license that allows reuse, modification, and redistribution with minimal conditions, typically just preserving the copyright notice and license text. By contrast, the Apple App Store License (A), Microsoft EULA (D), and Adobe EULA (E) are proprietary end-user license agreements that restrict copying, modification, and redistribution, so they are not open-source licenses.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
Apple App Store License
Why it's wrong here
The Apple App Store License governs distribution of apps through Apple's proprietary storefront, imposing Apple's terms rather than granting the freedoms (use, modification, redistribution) that define open-source licences. It is tempting because it is a genuine software licence, and would be the correct answer if the question asked for a proprietary or end-user distribution agreement.
- ✓
GNU GPL
Why this is correct
The GNU GPL is a copyleft licence: derivative works must be distributed under the same terms, guaranteeing source code remains open. This satisfies the stem's requirement for an open-source licence, unlike proprietary EULAs or permissive alternatives.
- ✓
MIT License
Why this is correct
The MIT License is a permissive open-source licence, allowing reuse, modification and redistribution with only attribution required. It satisfies the stem's requirement for an open-source licence, contrasting with copyleft licences that impose stricter redistribution conditions.
- ✗
Microsoft EULA
Why it's wrong here
The Microsoft EULA is a proprietary end-user licence agreement that reserves all rights to Microsoft and prohibits modification or redistribution, so it cannot be an open-source licence. It is tempting because it is a genuine, familiar software licence, and would be the correct choice if the question asked for a proprietary commercial licence.
- ✗
Adobe EULA
Why it's wrong here
The Adobe EULA is a proprietary end-user licence agreement restricting copying, modification and redistribution, so it grants none of the freedoms an open-source licence provides. It is tempting because it is a real, widely encountered software licence, and would be correct if the question asked for a commercial proprietary licence instead.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
This FC0-U71 question is part of Courseiva's 988-question bank — original exam-style content with full explanations and wrong-answer analysis, never real exam questions or exam dumps. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
This FC0-U71 practice question is part of Courseiva's free CompTIA certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the FC0-U71 exam.