Actually, have an organization like the OSI serves a very good purpose. For example, it allows patent holders gifting their patents to the FOSS community to not have to worry about the definition of open source in their pledges. They can simply say that they're making a non-assertion pledge to any FOSS developers and that developers working under an OSI approved license is the acid test.
Without such a body, just about anybody could call their code "open source" and get away with it. For every piece of software out there, there would be this huge debate over whether it is or isn't open source and as a result, most people would become distrustful of the phrase whenever they see it.
I understand your position... well, good. If you take away their security blanket, it will force them to do what they should be doing in the first place: read the license.
But the truth is that we live in a culture that looks for such certifications.
Do you study the engineering data on the bumpers of a car your about to buy to make sure it lives up to some standard? Or do you place faith in a process that's governed by the Department of Transportation.
I'm not saying that people shouldn't read the license. But having the OSI, or an organization like it, is worthwhile.
db
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox
