It's not entitlement, it's the entire purpose of OSS. You are free to modify, distribute, and profit from other people's code. If you can't do any of these things, then the project is NOT OSS. Simple as that.

Entitlement is when you expect that OSS contributors must provide you with a warranty or a certain feature you need for your business activity. They are not.

▲

xigoi 17 hours ago | parent [-]

Nowhere in the license does it claim that it’s an Open Source™ license.

▲

orra 17 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The page summarises the license as “Basically… the MIT do-whatever-you-want license”. The MIT license is of course one of the most popular permissive open source licenses.

This is an incredibly misleading comparison. The subsequent clause is a complete contradiction, not a subtle clarification.

▲

mirzap 17 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

People who use it claim it's Open Source

	▲	xigoi 10 hours ago \| parent [-]
		They are using “open source” as a generic descriptor, not as the unregistered trademark of the OSI.