Agreed that the labels matter and some of them are slippery. Some are made slippery with cavalier intent by influential people, either by redefining or hitching their movement's cart to a better known thing. Stallman and others want to expand open source to be more than what the license says. I am proud of the achievements of that movement, but I regret that muddying labels leads to dilution and confusion.

Apple recognizes the state of this confusion and perhaps wisely uses a different definition to avoid conflict. The Clojure maintainers do not, because they interpret Open Source by its original definition. Just because a collective group is involved does not mean its maintainers are compelled to the responsibilities conveyed by Stallman et al's extension of what open source is.