RMS on OpenMotif

[Richard Stallman]

    >      Ironically, that restriction excludes nearly all the commercial GNU/Linux
    >      distributions. They typically include some non-free software--an
    >      unfortunate policy--and hardly any of them fits the criterion specified
    >      in the Motif license. 

    The OpenMotif licensing FAQ clarifies that the reference is to the
    *kernel* of the operating system only, without regard to bundled utility
    programs.

In that case, they should change the license and say so explicitly.
(Though this is just a side issue.)

    >      Their definition of the term "open source" is very different from the
	 one used by the Open Source Movement, thus causing confusion.

    Similarly, the FAQ explicitly states an intent to conform to the OSD.  

The problem is that they are using the term "open source" with their
own private (lax) definition.  Good intentions don't make the problem
go away.  Using a different term for their meaning would make THIS
problem go away.

Given the other problems, though, hair-splitting about this one
doesn't seem especially useful.