Use of "open source"

Brian Behlendorf brian at
Wed Jan 3 18:23:34 UTC 2007

On Wed, 3 Jan 2007, DShofi at wrote:
> 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?

Because while of course *you* will be very careful to only use that term 
to apply to licenses that irrefutably pass the requirements, others might 
not be so cautious.


More information about the License-discuss mailing list