It is not generally considered Open Source. The new license was rejected by the OSI, which is generally regarded as the defacto arbitrator of if something is O

It is not generally considered Open Source. The new license was rejected by the OSI, which is generally regarded as the defacto arbitrator of if something is OSS or not. It was also rejected by Red Hat and Debian as being not open source. There are various issues with the license, including the scope of what they considered tainted. You could read the mailing list archives on the subject, or there appears to be a summary at https://opensource.stackexchange.com/a/7523 https://opensource.stackexchange.com/a/7523 The newly submitted v2 of the license hasn't resolved (m)any of the problems that the OSI has raised, and isn't expected to be approved either.