Personally, I have never accepted the OSI definition of open source.
They may have tried (and failed) to trademark the term, but to me the
term still means that the code is visible and modifiable, not that it
is given away. The important thing is that you can see what the code
is doing and why, are able to modify it for your own personal use, and
the investment doesn't disappear if the company behind it collapses or
simply loses interest in the product.
The world doesn't need another FSF. I thought that the OSI was going
put together an alternative, but it looks like they are still hung up
on the freedom religion even without Perens. As far as I'm concerned,
they represent no one but themselves.