This is not helpful:<p>> <i>This helped us realize that there is a vocal minority who still, for very good reasons, finds this phrase protected and specific.</i><p>It's not a vocal minority who fights misuse of the term open source. It's basically everyone invested in this movement, even if FOSS has come to be a clearer wording in my circles. It's a minority of business men trying to misapply the term to have their cake and eat it too, to create "open source" software without giving the freedom rights that define open source.<p>Just call it source available then and live with the negative connotation. They are justified.<p>Also:<p>> <i>Today, nearly all open source software is written by or financed by corporations.</i><p>It's always a bit sad and funny when people living in their bubble lose the grasp on reality. The statement is of course not true at all, the big majority of open source software continues to be written by free developers in their free time. But someone from that side of the business world wouldn't know that. What is true is that many big projects are controlled by corporations, and there is corporate influence on the biggest independent projects, like Linux. But that's not what the statement said.