Why does the “spirit” of the open source mean more than just a license

The arguments are often resolved about what is not “open source” by postponing the open source initiative (OSI): If there is part of the program available under a chosen license rubber as an “open source” by the official OSI “identification“Then this open source program.

But the water is muddy when it comes into nuts and screws from legal definitions in exchange for “spirit” what really means the open source. In fact, there is a slight difference in the open source in exchange for discussing royal software: Did the “Open Source Company” disable its project by sliding the basic features behind a commercial wall? How much transparency about project development? How much direct inputs that “society” really possesses in a specific project?

For many, the open source is not only related to the legal ability to use and modify code; Culture, transparency and governance around it is very important.

Everyone knows the version that Google is missing from Android that charges on smartphones and tablets, full of a set of applications and services. The Basic Android Open Source project (AOSP,,, Which were released under APache 2.0-Carenese lenient, available to anyone to reach “Fork”, and adjust their devices projects.

Android, through almost any definition, is an open source as it happens. Google has used this fact in its defense against anti -competition criticism, noting that Amazon has re -Android for a group of fire mark devices. But all this ignores separately.Anti -lifting agreementsGoogle has signed with devices who are limited to use Proud versions of Android. Unlike something like Kubernetes, which sits under an independent institution with a variety of shareholders of companies and society, Android sits under direct control of Google without a great deal of transparency on the road map or community inputs.

“Perhaps Android, in the sense of licensing, is the most reliable and completely open” thing “,” Louis VillaThe co -founder and general advisor at Tidelift said in a discussion episode in Open case CON25 In London this week. “All licenses are exactly as you want – but good luck in getting a patch in it, and we wish you success when the next version is even.”

This reaches the essence of the discussion: The open source can be something of illusion. Lack of real independence can mean that there is no agency for those who want to participate properly in the project. It can also raise questions about the project’s long -term validity, as it is clear from the uninterrupted open source companies that have transformed licenses to protect their commercial interests.

“If you are considering practical access to the open source, it goes beyond the license, right?” Peter ZetsifThe founder of the open source database services company, Perkona, said in the discussion episode. “Governance is very important, because if it is one company, they can change a license like” that. “

These feelings were emerging in a separate conversation by DOtan horovitsOpen source Evangelist at the Cloud Native Computing Foundation (CNCF), where he thought of the open source “turns to the dark side”. He pointed out that in most cases, problems arise when a single seller project decides to make changes based on his own business needs from other pressure. “Who asks the question, It is the open source of the seller? “I said this question for a few years, and in 2025, this question is more important than ever.”

Artificial intelligence factor

These discussions will not go anywhere any time soon, as the open source appeared as a main pivotal point in the world of artificial intelligence.

The Chinese Deepseek arrived with a stir from the back of the open -source noise, and although the Massachusetts Institute of Technology for models is largely recognized as open source, there are still black holes about training data among other components. This is why Huging Face researchers are trying to create a “more open” version of Deepseek.

Meanwhile, Meta has long installed an open source century with regard to the large Llama (LLMS) models, although Llama Not open source Through most estimates – models, although “open” more than others have commercial restrictions.

“I have Quibles and my interests on the definition of AI open source, but it is really clear that what Llama is doing is not open source,” said Villa.

Emily AwmiPA consultant for open source and host companies Open source podcastHe added that such attempts “spoil” the meaning behind the “open source” is a testimony of its inherent strength.

“It appears how strong the brand of the open source – the fact that people are trying to spoil it, means that people care.”

However, much of this may be for organizational reasons. The European Union AI Law has a special sculptor of the “free and open” autonomous artificial intelligence systems (regardless of those that are considered an “unacceptable danger”). Villa says this is moving towards clarifying the reason for the company’s desire to rewrite the book of rules on the meaning of “open source” already.

Villa said: “There are many actors who now want, due to the rights of the brand ownership (open source) and organizational effects, to change the definition, and this is terrible.”

Clear parameters

While there are clear arguments to apply additional criteria that include the “spirit” of the open source intended to be everything, the presence of clear parameters – as is determined by the license – keeps simple and less vulnerable to accurate subjectivity.

How much is society’s participation will be necessary for something to be “really open sources”? On the practical and legal level, maintaining the definition is limited to the license logically.

Stefano MavoliOSI, the executive director of OSI, said that although some organizations and institutions tend to ideas about “open design, society and development”, these are all main philosophical concepts.

“The goal of definitions is to have criteria that can be recorded, and focusing on the license is how this is done,” Mavoli said in a statement told Techcrunch. “Society and the global industry depend on the definition of the open source and now the definition of an open source AI as objective measures they can depend on.”