[DetroitThrow]

>It is open-source!

No, it's not. Please read number 5, it might enlighten you to what people colloquially consider open source, which didn't have a dictionary definition until technical people started using this definition: https://opensource.org/osd

>And the fact, people on here don't know that shows people on here don't know the difference.

..What? Do you know what OSS vs FOSS is?

[HeatrayEnjoyer]

OSD is god and gets to prescribe what is and is not open source? Says who?

[maleldil]

The whole idea is that we need a definition that everyone agrees With. The OSD is what the software community at large agreed, so any licences that claim to be open-source are compared to that.

[DetroitThrow]

This doesn't match the Webster's definition either. If your response to that is "there are no gods anyways" then you've earned yourself a chuckle.