A lot of organizations may behave that way, but open source itself is not hostile to free software. Keep in mind that basically everything that qualifies as free software also qualifies as open source.
Sure under a technical definition Open Source all Free Software is open source, however not all Open Source software is Free Software.
That is the core of the problem, as we move forward in time, the amount of software that is "Open Source" while not being Free expands, not contracts.
In my mind, it's only licenses and the software they're applied to, not organizations, that can be open source or not.
> Sure under a technical definition Open Source all Free Software is open source, however not all Open Source software is Free Software.
Neither category is a subset of the other. For example, SQLite is free software but not open source, because the Free Software Definition includes public domain software, but the Open Source Definition explicitly excludes it. And prior to Perl's adoption of the GPL, it was open source but not free software due to the Artistic License 1.0. Anyway, keep in mind that these examples are really rare, and that the vast majority of programs are either both or neither.
> That is the core of the problem, as we move forward in time, the amount of software that is "Open Source" while not being Free expands, not contracts.
I can't think of any programs in recent times that are open source but not free software. Do you know of any?
Mis-information. The Open Source Definition (https://opensource.org/osd) has no such exclusion. Read it for yourself.
https://opensource.org/node/878 https://opensource.org/faq/#public-domain
My reading is the core problem is that not every jurisdiction recognizes public domain dedications, so for some people, such software may be no different than "all rights reserved".