FWIW, while I agree with the general sentiment of your post, I understand that there is some debate about whether or not OSI - strictly speaking - coined the te

FWIW, while I agree with the general sentiment of your post, I understand that there is some debate about whether or not OSI - strictly speaking - coined the term "Open Source" or not. That is, I've seen reference to citations of people showing use of the phrase "open source" that predate OSI by a decade or more. I never dug deeply into the issue because I don't consider it terribly important. I consider the OSD to be the effective, de facto (but not de jure) definition of Open Source regardless of this particular minor quibble. Still, it could matter it it ever came down to legal proceedings. But in everyday, colloquial terms, I think the OSD just "is" the definition of Open Source. Edit: Yeah, see @CogitoCogito's post for more on the "Open Source predates OSI" argument. The counter-argument, I suppose, is that they didn't "coin" the phrase in the strictest sense, but were possibly the first to rigorously define it and give it meaning within a specific context. Whether or not one accepts that argument, or a similar argument, is obviously open to debate.