[jkrems]

Yeah, but that's a really dangerous position to take and if they'd work with me I'd be quick to set them straight. Because that path leads to legal adventure.

What you are describing is "source available", not "open source". And that's a huge difference in practice. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Source-available_software

[tlrobinson]

I'd add "redistribute" to the GP's definition, but the point stands that the definition of "open source" is not "licensed using an OSI approved license"

[azmenak]

A “source available” example

https://github.com/highcharts/highcharts