Is this license open source?

[bruce at perens.com]

From: Mark Wells <mark at pc-intouch.com>
> The interesting thing is that this license is *not* an open source
> license.  (The OSD specifically prohibits discrimination against
> individuals or groups.)  So the set of open-source licenses is not quite a
> superset of the set of free software licenses.

No, sorry. Although the Open Source campaign differs from the ideals of free
software, the Open Source _Definition_ defines a free software license.

The Open Source Definition was written as the "Debian Free Software
Guidelines" (DFSG).  The DFSG was part of Debian's social contract
with the free software community, which was drafted by me and refined
with the help of the Debian developers until it was voted their project
policy. We had decided that Debian would be 100% free software, so we
needed a definition of free software. OSI was formed 8 months after this.

Once you say "You may use this software under the terms of the GPL.", you
have an Open Source license, the GPL. Any additional text is part of another
license entirely, a modified BSD license that is not compliant with the Open
Source definition. But we allow any number of licenses, it only matters that
_one_ of them is an Open Source license.

	Thanks

	Bruce