I very strongly disagree. Historically, the whole point of open source is that you get a license that specifies your rights. You want software that you know you

I very strongly disagree. Historically, the whole point of open source is that you get a license that specifies your rights. You want software that you know you can use and modify even if the original author later doesn't approve. "Somewhat open source" is simply not open source in the way that term is used. (Naturally, you're free to redefine the term for your own usage, but that doesn't change anything.) Edit: Past terms used for this type of license are freeware and source available, but that doesn't make them open source.