[James_K]

It's funny how they lied about being open source twice and got the exact same reaction from it both times, but still haven't learnt their lesson. All they need to do to avoid backlash is call it source available (like it is) but instead they chose to mislead people for no real benefit to themselves.

[jeremyjh]

It’s very clear they seek the goodwill and engagement associated with open source projects without the costs.

[thayne]

Well, I also understand not wanting to call it source available, because that is used to describe software where the source code is available, but the license restricts basically any usage of the source.

I think we really need one or more labels for licenses somewhere in between open source and source available.