You misunderstood my comment; we probably agree. If something isn't open source, it shouldn't be labeled as open source.
I'm saying that there ought to be a more descriptive term for this license to differentiate from the usual proprietary "source available" licenses. ezekg's comment gives an appropriately descriptive label, "Fair Source".
I'm saying that there ought to be a more descriptive term for this license to differentiate from the usual proprietary "source available" licenses. ezekg's comment gives an appropriately descriptive label, "Fair Source".