Re:Let's Talk About Open Source
by ewan-mclean on Friday August 04, 2023 @08:19AM
(#36998940)
Did anyone claim that it was `Free Software`?
Does anyone ever claim that they're trying to release free-software but not FSF free-software?
I think the issue is that the opposite of `closed-source` is clearly not `OSI Approved License(tm) open-source`.
If had the influence they like to claim with their "we invented the term open-source" myth, why don't they go invent some term for "non-closed source, non-OSI approved license(tm)" software, and everyone will use that.
BTW, here's a handy list of uses of `open-source` going back to 1985...
Seems that the term was already in existence, I guess that's why the OSI's attempt at "open-source(tm)" went down in flames...
Free software gives the rights to the USER - the software can be USED in any way without restriction.
The responsibilities kick in when re-distributing the software - you must pass on these rights.
The BUSL is not that, it is not a free software license.