Why "open-source" means "free to distribute"?

[Alex Rousskov]

On Thu, 6 May 2004, Lawrence Rosen wrote:

> If those licenses are not approved by OSI, they may not use our
> certification mark. We don't care what they "look like."

Does OSI approve the text of the license, the title of the license, or
a combination of the text and the title?

Where does it say that "OSI certified" mark cannot be used with a BSD
license text titled "Foo Open License v1.2"?

Does "OSI certified" mark usage terms allow placing the mark on a site
that distributes open and not open software?

Alex.

P.S. Don't get me wrong: I am not advocating such a sneaky practice.
     I am just trying to understand whether OSI certification is
     designed to be robust against such attempts to dilute the
     value of the trademark.
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3