Use of "open source"

[DShofi at atmi.com]

Matthew wrote: 

> I think it meets the OSD.  However, please don't call it open source
> unless/until OSI approves it.

While I agree that license proliferation makes it harder to consolidate 
code bases and determine license compatibility and while I understand the 
usefulness of the OSI certification mark program, it seems that the OSI is 
in no position to restrict anyone's labelling and use of a license as 
"open source" that satisfies all of the definitional characteristics even 
if it is not OSI approved.  What am I missing?  Why urge that the term 
"open source" be withheld unless approved?

David

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20070103/d249bff5/attachment.html>