One of six themes that emerged from the EOLE 2026 online kick-off workshop (25 June). Background and stance of the cycle: see the kick-off topic.
Why it matters for sovereignty. Regulation is fast becoming the place where “open source” is (re)defined. If the legislator’s definition drifts from what the community means, the exemptions, priorities and procurement rules meant to foster openness will misfire, and a key sovereignty lever is lost.
What came up at the workshop. This was the most supported topic when we voted. Every new EU text “tries to redefine what open source might be”, and the notion is “not clear enough for the legislator first”. The concept of “placing on the market” is ambiguous: is sharing open source code itself a placing on the market? When does an open source project become a “product” under the CRA? Another blind spot: EU texts finally let community open source in, but still look at it from the community angle only, ignoring the commercial reality of vendors sustaining projects through subscriptions. A useful reframing from the closing discussion: “open source” is a portfolio (licence, project, community, development model, vendor ecosystem, governance), much like “intellectual property”, and regulation needs to name which element it addresses.
What already exists to build on. OSI’s Open Source Definition (and the OSAID for AI) and the broader family of open content / data / hardware definitions; SPDX licence lists; the CRA / AI Act / Data Act texts and their open source provisions; inno3’s analysis Open source and AI: three European regulations, three logics, one ecosystem; business practices such as BUSL vs open source plus trademark.
Open questions. When does a project become a “product”? How to write a definition usable in regulation and in calls for tenders? How to represent commercial open source without diluting the definition? Where exactly is the gap between the AI Act / CRA wording and the community definition?
How to contribute. Reply below with references, counter-points, cases and projects, ideally by end of September 2026. We are looking for one or two rapporteurs per theme to carry it towards the in-person event in Barcelona (November 2026); volunteer by replying below or by direct message on this forum. Possible outputs: a short “definition map” (regulation vs community) and a position note for upcoming EU texts.