Or are you saying that because I'm stating that open is referring to the licensing, that implies the free refers to the gratis part? I guess that's correct, but that's not a point I raised earlier so I'm not inconsistent in my position.
No. That didn't begin with me. This entire discussion is filled with people defending your use of "free" to mean gratis.
> I'm pointing out that that's not what we're talking about
Okay, well now it's not clear what you're trying to communicate with the word "free".
My point was that if you were using the word "free" to mean gratis, then the best thing would be to call it "royalty-free" instead. That's already the accepted nomenclature for creative/industry use, anyway, and it'd be the least confusing choice for this case in particular.