"Open Source Constitution"?

[Bruce Perens]

Chuck Swiger wrote:

> Those people [2] who see a strong distinction between Microsoft 
> selling a product containing Open Source Software such as zlib and 
> IPFW; Red Hat selling a product containing OSS such as the Linux 
> kernel and a mix of GNU and BSD-licensed userland utilities; or Apple 
> selling a product containing OSS such as the Mach kernel plus a mix of 
> BSD and GNU utilities; are applying double standards.

This paragraph seems to avoid the major distinction, which is the 
proprietary component of the work.

    Thanks

    Bruce