The Open Source Definition: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 18:18, 18 May 2024

The Open Source Definition (OSD) is a document published by the Open Source Initiative. Derived from Bruce Perens' Debian Free Software Guidelines, the definition is the most common standard for open-source software. The definition has ten criteria, such as requiring freely accessed source code and granting the open-source rights to everyone who receives a copy of the program. Covering both copyleft and permissive licenses, it is effectively identical to the definition of free software, but motivated by more pragmatic and business-friendly considerations. The Open Source Initiative's board votes on proposals of licenses to certify that they are compliant with the definition, and maintains a list of compliant licenses on its website. The definition has been adapted into the Open Knowledge Foundation's Open Definition for open knowledge and into open hardware definitions.

History

As Netscape released the open-source Mozilla browser in 1998, Bruce Perens drafted a set of open-source guidelines to go with the release.^[1] A modified version of this definition was adopted by the Open Source Initiative (OSI) as the Open Source Definition.^[2]^[3] The OSI uses the label "open source", rather than "free software", because it felt that the latter term had undesirable ideological and political freight, and it wanted to focus on the pragmatic and business-friendly arguments for open-source software.^[2] It adopted a closed rather than membership-driven organizational model in order to draft the definition and work together with a wider variety of stakeholders than other free or open-source projects.^[2]

Criteria

Providing access to the source code is not enough for software to be considered "open-source".^[4] The Open Source Definition requires that ten criteria be met:^[5]^[2]

Free redistribution^[5]
Source code must be accessible and the license must permit redistribution in the form of source code (rather than object code).^[5] In order to modify the software, access to source code is required.^[6]
Derivative works must be allowed and able to be redistributed under the same licensing terms as the open-source product^[5]
The license may require that the original software be distributed intact, but only if modifications are able to be distributed as patches without restriction.^[5]^[6]
No discrimination between users^[5]
No discrimination between uses, including commercial use^[5]
Everyone who receives a copy of the program is granted all the open-source rights^[5]
The license must cover all the code, not a particular product or distribution.^[5]^[6]
There may not be restrictions on other software distributed at the same time^[5]
Technological neutrality—cannot restrict use to any particular technology.^[5] For example, a license that requires a user to click a box agreeing to it is not free because the work cannot be distributed as a paper copy.^[6]

The Open Source Definition is available under a Creative Commons (CC BY 4.0) license.^[7] It covers both copyleft—where redistribution and derivative works must be released under a free license—and permissive licenses—where derivative works can be released under any license. It is part of the open source movement rather than the free software movement, and seeks to promote the availability of open-source software for anyone seeking to reuse it, even the makers of proprietary software.^[2]^[8]^[6] It does not address warranty disclaimers, although these are very common in open-source software.^[6] The definition does not specify a governance structure for open-source projects.^[2]

Compliant licenses

The criteria are used by the OSI to approve certain licenses as compatible with the definition, and maintain a list of compliant licenses. New licenses have to submit a formal proposal that is discussed by the OSI mailing list before it is approved or rejected by the OSI board. Seven approved licenses are particularly recommended by the OSI as "popular, widely used, or having strong communities":^[9]

Apache License 2.0
BSD 3-Clause and BSD 2-Clause Licenses
All versions of the GNU General Public License
All versions of the GNU Lesser Public License
MIT License
Mozilla Public License 2.0
Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL)
Eclipse Public License version 2.0

Reception

The Open Source Definition is the most widely used definition for open-source software,^[10] and is often used as a standard for whether a project is open source.^[7] It and the official definitions of free software by the Free Software Foundation (FSF) essentially cover the same software licenses.^[2]^[11] Nevertheless, there is a values difference between the free software and open source movements: the former is more based on ethics and values, the latter on pragmatism.^[2]

Derived definitions

The Open Knowledge Foundation's Open Definition is substantially derivative of the Open Source Definition.^[12]

The Open Source Hardware Statement of Principles is adapted from the Open Source Definition.^[13]^[10]

References

^ Overly, Michael R. (2003). The Open Source Handbook. Pike & Fischer. p. 5. ISBN 978-0-937275-12-2.
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g ^h Gardler, Ross; Walli, Stephen R (2022). "Evolving Perspective on Community and Governance". Open Source Law, Policy and Practice. Oxford University PressOxford. p. 47–48, 52. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198862345.003.0002. ISBN 978-0-19-886234-5.
^ Katz, Andrew (2022). "Everything Open". Open Source Law, Policy and Practice. Oxford University Press. p. 521. ISBN 978-0-19-260687-7.
^ Greenleaf, Graham; Lindsay, David (2018). Public Rights: Copyright's Public Domains. Cambridge University Press. p. 485. ISBN 978-1-107-13406-5.
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g ^h ⁱ ^j ^k Erlich, Zippy (2007). "Open Source Software". Handbook of Research on Open Source Software. IGI Global. pp. 187–188. ISBN 978-1591409991.
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f Laurent, Andrew M. St (2004). Understanding Open Source and Free Software Licensing: Guide to Navigating Licensing Issues in Existing & New Software. O'Reilly Media, Inc. pp. 9–11. ISBN 978-0-596-55395-1.
^ ^a ^b Mertic, John (2023). Open Source Projects - Beyond Code: A blueprint for scalable and sustainable open source projects. Packt Publishing Ltd. p. 5. ISBN 978-1-83763-385-2.
^ Meeker, Heather J. (2008). The Open Source Alternative: Understanding Risks and Leveraging Opportunities. John Wiley & Sons. pp. 21–22. ISBN 978-0-470-25581-0.
^ Smith, P McCoy (2022). "Copyright, Contract, and Licensing in Open Source". Open Source Law, Policy and Practice. Oxford University PressOxford. pp. 108–111. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198862345.003.0003. ISBN 978-0-19-886234-5.
^ ^a ^b De Maria, Carmelo; Díaz Lantada, Andrés; Di Pietro, Licia; Ravizza, Alice; Ahluwalia, Arti (2022). "Open-Source Medical Devices: Concept, Trends, and Challenges Toward Equitable Healthcare Technology". Engineering Open-Source Medical Devices. Cham: Springer International Publishing. p. 4. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-79363-0_1. ISBN 978-3-030-79362-3.
^ Kelty, Christpher M. (2008). "The Cultural Significance of free Software – Two Bits" (PDF). Duke University Press. p. 99. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2016-03-04. Retrieved 2016-02-24.
^ Martin, Victoria (2022). The Complete Guide to Open Scholarship. Bloomsbury Publishing. p. 27. ISBN 979-8-216-06415-2.
^ Bonvoisin, Jérémy; Mies, Robert; Boujut, Jean-François; Stark, Rainer (2017). "What is the "Source" of Open Source Hardware?". Journal of Open Hardware. 1 (1). doi:10.5334/joh.7. ISSN 2514-1708.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)

External links

The Open Source Definition
The Open Source Definition by Bruce Perens, Open Sources: Voices from the Open Source Revolution, January 1999, ISBN 1-56592-582-3

[1] Overly, Michael R. (2003). The Open Source Handbook. Pike & Fischer. p. 5. ISBN 978-0-937275-12-2.

[b733-2] ^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g ^h Gardler, Ross; Walli, Stephen R (2022). "Evolving Perspective on Community and Governance". Open Source Law, Policy and Practice. Oxford University PressOxford. p. 47–48, 52. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198862345.003.0002. ISBN 978-0-19-886234-5.

[3] Katz, Andrew (2022). "Everything Open". Open Source Law, Policy and Practice. Oxford University Press. p. 521. ISBN 978-0-19-260687-7.

[4] Greenleaf, Graham; Lindsay, David (2018). Public Rights: Copyright's Public Domains. Cambridge University Press. p. 485. ISBN 978-1-107-13406-5.

[v459-5] ^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g ^h ⁱ ^j ^k Erlich, Zippy (2007). "Open Source Software". Handbook of Research on Open Source Software. IGI Global. pp. 187–188. ISBN 978-1591409991.

[Laurent-6] ^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f Laurent, Andrew M. St (2004). Understanding Open Source and Free Software Licensing: Guide to Navigating Licensing Issues in Existing & New Software. O'Reilly Media, Inc. pp. 9–11. ISBN 978-0-596-55395-1.

[Mertic-7] Mertic, John (2023). Open Source Projects - Beyond Code: A blueprint for scalable and sustainable open source projects. Packt Publishing Ltd. p. 5. ISBN 978-1-83763-385-2.

[8] Meeker, Heather J. (2008). The Open Source Alternative: Understanding Risks and Leveraging Opportunities. John Wiley & Sons. pp. 21–22. ISBN 978-0-470-25581-0.

[l662-9] Smith, P McCoy (2022). "Copyright, Contract, and Licensing in Open Source". Open Source Law, Policy and Practice. Oxford University PressOxford. pp. 108–111. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198862345.003.0003. ISBN 978-0-19-886234-5.

[j787-10] De Maria, Carmelo; Díaz Lantada, Andrés; Di Pietro, Licia; Ravizza, Alice; Ahluwalia, Arti (2022). "Open-Source Medical Devices: Concept, Trends, and Challenges Toward Equitable Healthcare Technology". Engineering Open-Source Medical Devices. Cham: Springer International Publishing. p. 4. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-79363-0_1. ISBN 978-3-030-79362-3.

[11] Kelty, Christpher M. (2008). "The Cultural Significance of free Software – Two Bits" (PDF). Duke University Press. p. 99. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2016-03-04. Retrieved 2016-02-24.

[12] Martin, Victoria (2022). The Complete Guide to Open Scholarship. Bloomsbury Publishing. p. 27. ISBN 979-8-216-06415-2.

[13] Bonvoisin, Jérémy; Mies, Robert; Boujut, Jean-François; Stark, Rainer (2017). "What is the "Source" of Open Source Hardware?". Journal of Open Hardware. 1 (1). doi:10.5334/joh.7. ISSN 2514-1708.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{short description|Certification by the Open Source Initiative}}
+{{italic title}}
-{{lead too short|date=November 2023}}
+'''The Open Source Definition''' (OSD) is a document published by the [[Open Source Initiative]]. Derived from [[Bruce Perens]]' [[Debian Free Software Guidelines]], the definition is the most common standard for [[open-source software]]. The definition has ten criteria, such as requiring [[source-available software|freely accessed source code]] and granting the open-source rights to everyone who receives a copy of the program. Covering both [[copyleft]] and [[permissive license]]s, it is effectively identical to the definition of [[free software]], but motivated by more pragmatic and business-friendly considerations. The Open Source Initiative's board votes on proposals of licenses to certify that they are compliant with the definition, and maintains a list of compliant licenses on its website. The definition has been adapted into the [[Open Knowledge Foundation]]'s [[Open Definition]] for [[open knowledge]] and into [[open hardware]] definitions.
-'''''The Open Source Definition''''' is a document published by the [[Open Source Initiative]], to determine whether a software license can be labeled with the "Open Source Initiative approved" certification mark.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://opensource.org/pressreleases/certified-open-source.php |title=Open Source Certification |last=Raymond |first=Eric S. |author-link=Eric S. Raymond |date=June 16, 1999 |website=[[Open Source Initiative]] |access-date=November 18, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171201032457/https://opensource.org/pressreleases/certified-open-source.php |archive-date=December 1, 2017 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>United States Trademark Registration 78,813,707</ref>
 == History ==
+As [[Netscape]] released the open-source [[Mozilla]] browser in 1998, [[Bruce Perens]] drafted a set of open-source guidelines to go with the release.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Overly |first1=Michael R. |title=The Open Source Handbook |date=2003 |publisher=Pike & Fischer |isbn=978-0-937275-12-2 |page=5 |language=en}}</ref> A modified version of this definition was adopted by the [[Open Source Initiative]] (OSI) as the Open Source Definition.<ref name="b733"/><ref>{{cite book | last=Katz | first=Andrew | title=Open Source Law, Policy and Practice |chapter=Everything Open | publisher=Oxford University Press | year=2022 | isbn=978-0-19-260687-7 | chapter-url=https://academic.oup.com/book/44727/chapter/378969640 |p=521 }}</ref> The OSI uses the label "open source", rather than "free software", because it felt that the latter term had undesirable ideological and political freight, and it wanted to focus on the pragmatic and business-friendly arguments for [[open-source software]].<ref name="b733"/> It adopted a closed rather than membership-driven organizational model in order to draft the definition and work together with a wider variety of stakeholders than other free or open-source projects.<ref name="b733"/>
+==Criteria==
+[[Source-available software|Providing access to the source code]] is not enough for software to be considered "open-source".<ref>{{cite book |last1=Greenleaf |first1=Graham |last2=Lindsay |first2=David |title=Public Rights: Copyright's Public Domains |date=2018 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1-107-13406-5 |page=485 |language=en}}</ref> The Open Source Definition requires that ten criteria be met:<ref name="v459">{{cite book | last=Erlich | first=Zippy | title=Handbook of Research on Open Source Software | chapter=Open Source Software | publisher=IGI Global | year=2007 |  pages=187–188|isbn=978-1591409991}}</ref><ref name="b733">{{cite book | last=Gardler | first=Ross | last2=Walli | first2=Stephen R | title=Open Source Law, Policy and Practice | chapter=Evolving Perspective on Community and Governance | publisher=Oxford University PressOxford | date=2022 | isbn=978-0-19-886234-5 | doi=10.1093/oso/9780198862345.003.0002 | page=47–48, 52}}</ref>
+#Free redistribution<ref name="v459"/>
+#[[Source code]] must be accessible and the license must permit redistribution in the form of source code (rather than [[object code]]).<ref name="v459"/> In order to modify the software, access to source code is required.<ref name="Laurent"/>
+#[[Derivative work]]s must be allowed and able to be redistributed under the same licensing terms as the open-source product<ref name="v459"/>
+#The license may require that the original software be distributed intact, but only if modifications are able to be distributed as [[software patch|patches]] without restriction.<ref name="v459"/><ref name="Laurent"/>
+#No discrimination between users<ref name="v459"/>
+#No discrimination between uses, including commercial use<ref name="v459"/>
+#Everyone who receives a copy of the program is granted all the open-source rights<ref name="v459"/>
+#The license must cover all the code, not a particular product or distribution.<ref name="v459"/><ref name="Laurent"/>
+#There may not be restrictions on other software distributed at the same time<ref name="v459"/>
+#Technological neutrality—cannot restrict use to any particular technology.<ref name="v459"/> For example, a license that requires a user to [[clickwrap|click a box agreeing to it]] is not free because the work cannot be distributed as a paper copy.<ref name="Laurent"/>
+The Open Source Definition is available under a [[Creative Commons]] (CC BY 4.0) license.<ref name="Mertic">{{cite book |last1=Mertic |first1=John |title=Open Source Projects - Beyond Code: A blueprint for scalable and sustainable open source projects |date=2023 |publisher=Packt Publishing Ltd |isbn=978-1-83763-385-2 |page=5 |language=en}}</ref> It covers both [[copyleft]]—where redistribution and derivative works must be released under a free license—and [[permissive license]]s—where derivative works can be released under any license. It is part of the [[open source movement]] rather than the free software movement, and seeks to promote the availability of open-source software for anyone seeking to reuse it, even the makers of [[proprietary software]].<ref name="b733"/><ref>{{cite book |last1=Meeker |first1=Heather J. |title=The Open Source Alternative: Understanding Risks and Leveraging Opportunities |date=2008 |publisher=John Wiley & Sons |isbn=978-0-470-25581-0 |pages=21-22 |language=en}}</ref><ref name="Laurent">{{cite book |last1=Laurent |first1=Andrew M. St |title=Understanding Open Source and Free Software Licensing: Guide to Navigating Licensing Issues in Existing & New Software |date=2004 |publisher=O'Reilly Media, Inc. |isbn=978-0-596-55395-1 |pages=9-11 |language=en}}</ref> It does not address warranty disclaimers, although these are very common in open-source software.<ref name="Laurent"/> The definition does not specify a governance structure for open-source projects.<ref name="b733"/>
-The definition was taken from the exact text of the [[Debian Free Software Guidelines]], written and adapted primarily by [[Bruce Perens' Open Source Series|Bruce Perens]]<ref name=":0" /> with input from the Debian developers on a private Debian mailing list. The document was created 9 months before the formation of the Open Source Initiative.
+==Compliant licenses==
+The criteria are used by the OSI to approve certain licenses as compatible with the definition, and maintain a list of compliant licenses. New licenses have to submit a formal proposal that is discussed by the OSI mailing list before it is approved or rejected by the OSI board. Seven approved licenses are particularly recommended by the OSI as "popular, widely used, or having strong communities":<ref name="l662">{{cite book | last=Smith | first=P McCoy | title=Open Source Law, Policy and Practice | chapter=Copyright, Contract, and Licensing in Open Source | publisher=Oxford University PressOxford | date=2022 | isbn=978-0-19-886234-5 | doi=10.1093/oso/9780198862345.003.0003 | pages=108-111}}</ref>
+*[[Apache License 2.0]]
-== Definition ==
+*[[BSD licenses|BSD 3-Clause and BSD 2-Clause Licenses]]
+*All versions of the [[GNU General Public License]]
-Open source doesn't just mean access to the source code. The distribution terms of open-source software must comply with the following criteria:
+*All versions of the [[GNU Lesser Public License]]
+*[[MIT License]]
-# Free redistribution: The license shall not restrict any party from selling or giving away the software as a component of an aggregate software distribution containing programs from several different sources. The license shall not require a royalty or other fee for such sale.
+*[[Mozilla Public License]] 2.0
-# Source code: The program must include source code, and must allow distribution in source code as well as compiled form. Where some form of a product is not distributed with source code, there must be a well-publicized means of obtaining the source code for no more than a reasonable reproduction cost preferably, downloading via the Internet without charge. The source code must be the preferred form in which a programmer would modify the program. Deliberately obfuscated source code is not allowed. Intermediate forms such as the output of a preprocessor or translator are not allowed.
+*[[Common Development and Distribution License]] (CDDL)
-# Derived works: The license must allow modifications and derived works, and must allow them to be distributed under the same terms as the license of the original software.
+*[[Eclipse Public License]] version 2.0
-# Integrity of the author's source code: The license may restrict source-code from being distributed in modified form only if the license allows the distribution of "patch files" with the source code for the purpose of modifying the program at build time. The license must explicitly permit distribution of software built from modified source code. The license may require derived works to carry a different name or version number from the original software.
-# No discrimination against persons or groups: The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons.
-# No discrimination against fields of endeavor: The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic research.
-# Distribution of license: The rights attached to the program must apply to all to whom the program is redistributed without the need for execution of an additional license by those parties.
-# License must not be specific to a product: The rights attached to the program must not depend on the program's being part of a particular software distribution. If the program is extracted from that distribution and used or distributed within the terms of the program's license, all parties to whom the program is redistributed should have the same rights as those that are granted in conjunction with the original software distribution.
-# License must not restrict other software: The license must not place restrictions on other software that is distributed along with the licensed software. For example, the license must not insist that all other programs distributed on the same medium must be open-source software.
-# License must be technology-neutral: No provision of the license may be predicated on any individual technology or style of interface.
 == Reception ==
-The [[open source movement]]'s definition of [[open source software]] by the [[Open Source Initiative]] and the official definitions of [[free software]] by the [[Free Software Foundation]] (FSF) basically refer to the same [[software license]]s (with a few minor exceptions see [[Comparison of free and open-source software licenses]]), both definitions stand therefore for the same qualities and values.<ref name=":0">{{cite web |url=http://twobits.net/pub/Kelty-TwoBits.pdf |title=The Cultural Significance of free Software – Two Bits |last=Kelty |first=Christpher M. |date=2008 |publisher=[[Duke University Press]] |page=99 |access-date=2016-02-24 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304070704/http://twobits.net/pub/Kelty-TwoBits.pdf |archive-date=2016-03-04 |url-status=live }}</ref> Despite that, FSF founder [[Richard Stallman]] stresses underlying philosophical differences when he comments:
+The Open Source Definition is the most widely used definition for [[open-source software]],<ref name="j787">{{cite book | last=De Maria | first=Carmelo | last2=Díaz Lantada | first2=Andrés | last3=Di Pietro | first3=Licia | last4=Ravizza | first4=Alice | last5=Ahluwalia | first5=Arti | title=Engineering Open-Source Medical Devices | chapter=Open-Source Medical Devices: Concept, Trends, and Challenges Toward Equitable Healthcare Technology | publisher=Springer International Publishing | publication-place=Cham | date=2022 | isbn=978-3-030-79362-3 | doi=10.1007/978-3-030-79363-0_1 | page=4}}</ref> and is often used as a standard for whether a project is open source.<ref name="Mertic"/> It and the official definitions of [[free software]] by the [[Free Software Foundation]] (FSF) essentially cover the same [[software license]]s.<ref name="b733"/><ref>{{cite web |url=http://twobits.net/pub/Kelty-TwoBits.pdf |title=The Cultural Significance of free Software – Two Bits |last=Kelty |first=Christpher M. |date=2008 |publisher=[[Duke University Press]] |page=99 |access-date=2016-02-24 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304070704/http://twobits.net/pub/Kelty-TwoBits.pdf |archive-date=2016-03-04 |url-status=live }}</ref> Nevertheless, there is a values difference between the free software and open source movements: the former is more based on ethics and values, the latter on pragmatism.<ref name="b733"/>
-{{quotation|The term “open source” software is used by some people to mean more or less the same category as free software. It is not exactly the same class of software: they accept some licences that we consider too restrictive, and there are free software licences they have not accepted. However, the differences in extension of the category are small: nearly all free software is open source, and nearly all open source software is free.
-|Free Software Foundation<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html.en |title=Categories of free and nonfree software |website=[[Free Software Foundation]] |access-date=November 18, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171201041124/https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html.en |archive-date=December 1, 2017 |url-status=live }}</ref>}}
+===Derived definitions===
-[[Open Knowledge International]] (OKI)<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.timdavies.org.uk/2014/04/12/data-information-knowledge-and-power-exploring-open-knowledges-new-core-purpose/ |title=Data, information, knowledge and power – exploring Open Knowledge's new core purpose |last=Davies |first=Tim |date=April 12, 2014 |website=Tim's Blog |access-date=November 18, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170629081942/http://www.timdavies.org.uk/2014/04/12/data-information-knowledge-and-power-exploring-open-knowledges-new-core-purpose/ |archive-date=June 29, 2017 |url-status=live }}</ref> described in their [[The Open Definition|Open Definition]] for [[open content]], [[open data]], and [[open license]]s, "open/free" as synonymous in the definitions of open/free in the [[Open Source Definition]], the [[Free Software Definition|FSF]] and the [[Definition of Free Cultural Works]]:
+The [[Open Knowledge Foundation]]'s [[Open Definition]] is substantially derivative of the Open Source Definition.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Martin |first1=Victoria |title=The Complete Guide to Open Scholarship |date=2022 |publisher=Bloomsbury Publishing  |isbn=979-8-216-06415-2 |language=en|p=27}}</ref>
-{{quotation|This essential meaning matches that of "open" with respect to software as in the Open Source Definition and is synonymous with “free” or “libre” as in the Free Software Definition and Definition of Free Cultural Works.
-|The Open Definition<ref>{{cite web |url=http://opendefinition.org/od/2.1/en/ |title=Open Definition 2.1 |website=[[The Open Definition]] |access-date=November 18, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170127074917/http://opendefinition.org/od/2.1/en/ |archive-date=January 27, 2017 |url-status=live }}</ref>}}
+The Open Source Hardware Statement of Principles is adapted from the Open Source Definition.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Bonvoisin |first1=Jérémy |last2=Mies |first2=Robert |last3=Boujut |first3=Jean-François |last4=Stark |first4=Rainer |title=What is the “Source” of Open Source Hardware? |journal=Journal of Open Hardware |date=2017 |volume=1 |issue=1 |doi=10.5334/joh.7 |url=https://account.openhardware.metajnl.com/index.php/up-j-joh/article/view/joh.7 |language=en |issn=2514-1708}}</ref><ref name="j787"/>
 == See also ==
 {{Portal|Free and open-source software}}
@@ Line 41: / Line 48: @@
 == References ==
+{{reflist}}
-{{refs}}
 == External links ==
@@ Line 52: / Line 58: @@
 {{FOSS}}
-{{italic title}}
 {{DEFAULTSORT:Open Source Definition, The}}
 [[Category:Open source]]
 [[Category:Definitions]]