Simon PhippsThe only people who think they can define #OpenSource to suit their own needs are people who want to deny some or all others #SoftwareFreedom
Trevor Flowers@webmink That's a historical revision. "Open source" wasn't created to make software free (as in speech). At the time there was already a term and licenses for that. If you hadn't used the word "freedom" then I'd have no argument with your words.
@webmink I don't even disagree with what I suspect you mean. The people tweaking or breaking the meaning of open source do generally seem to want to limit the software in a variety of ways.
Dan Brown@webmink I've taken an interest in tracking such people/projects to greater understand when/why the term is misused:
https://github.com/ssddanbrown/Open-Source-Confusion-Cases
I've noticed VC involvement is a common thread, making me wonder about influence of funding return pressures, but might be a case of selection bias in what I'm observing.
GitHub - ssddanbrown/Open-Source-Confusion-Cases: A list of cases where open source licenses are misrepresented or where "Open Source" is used in a non-open-source-definition adhering manner.
A list of cases where open source licenses are misrepresented or where "Open Source" is used in a non-open-source-definition adhering manner. - ssddanbrown/Open-Source-Confusion-Cases