The fsf considers open source to basically be a marketing tactic for companies to sell services around free software. They don't like that the open source move

The fsf considers open source to basically be a marketing tactic for companies to sell services around free software. They don't like that the open source movement is focused on practical reasons to use free/opensource when freedom should be the main reason to use it. Especially in light of the fact that many times it is impractical to choose free/opensource software over proprietary software. Free software focuses on principals over pragmatism They are using free and opensource as interchangeable terms for the same code, but used by people with different goals. I think at the time of this article, there was no license that was one and not the other. Bruce Perens has openly stated that the GPL was the example for the open source definition.