Từ ❝mở❞ dễ bị lạm dụng hoặc hiểu sai hơn là ❝tự do❞

Khái niệm::
However, the obvious meaning for the expression “open source software” is “You can look at the source code.” Indeed, most people seem to misunderstand “open source software” that way. (The clear term for that meaning is “source available.”) That criterion is much weaker than the free software definition, much weaker also than the official definition of open source. It includes many programs that are neither free nor open source.

Why do people misunderstand it that way? Because that is the natural meaning of the words “open source.” But the concept for which the open source advocates sought another name was a variant of that of free software.

Since the obvious meaning for “open source” is not the meaning that its advocates intend, the result is that most people misunderstand the term. According to writer Neal Stephenson, “Linux is ‘open source’ software meaning, simply, that anyone can get copies of its source code files.” I don’t think he deliberately sought to reject or dispute the official definition. I think he simply applied the conventions of the English language to come up with a meaning for the term. The state of Kansas published a similar definition: “Make use of open-source software (OSS). OSS is software for which the source code is freely and publicly available, though the specific licensing agreements vary as to what one is allowed to do with that code.”
Nguồn:: Why Open Source Misses the Point of Free Software - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation

“CAN 3D printing be subversive?” asks a voice in the creepiest Internet video you’ll be likely to watch this month. It’s a trailer for Defcad.com, a search engine for 3D-printable designs for things “institutions and industries have an interest in keeping from us,” including “medical devices, drugs, goods, guns.”

The voice belongs to Cody Wilson, a law student in Texas who last year founded Defense Distributed, a controversial initiative to produce a printable “wiki weapon.” With Defcad, he is expanding beyond guns, allowing, say, drone enthusiasts to search for printable parts.

Mr. Wilson plays up Defcad’s commitment to “openness,” the latest opiate of the (iPad-toting) masses. Not only would Defcad’s search engine embrace “open source” — the three-minute trailer says so twice — but it would also feature “open data.” With so much openness, Defcad can’t possibly be evil, right?

One doesn’t need to look at projects like Defcad to see that “openness” has become a dangerously vague term, with lots of sex appeal but barely any analytical content. Certified as “open,” the most heinous and suspicious ideas suddenly become acceptable. Even the Church of Scientology boasts of its “commitment to open communication.”

Openness is today a powerful cult, a religion with its own dogmas. “Owning pipelines, people, products or even intellectual property is no longer the key to success. Openness is,” proclaims the Internet pundit Jeff Jarvis.

This fascination with “openness” stems mostly from the success of open-source software, publicly accessible computer code that anyone is welcome to improve. But lately it has been applied to everything from politics to philanthropy; recent book titles include “The Open-Source Everything Manifesto” and “Radical Openness.” There’s even “OpenCola” — a true soda drink for the masses.
Nguồn:: Opinion | Open and Closed - The New York Times

Khi nói đến mã nguồn mở, đa số chỉ để ý tới việc được đọc mã nguồn, chứ không để ý đến quyền được chỉnh sửa và phân phối nó
Việc sử dụng từ ❝mở❞ đã khiến cho O’Reilly thành công trong việc PR mã nguồn mở