I guess that depends on whether you think the motivations matter. When it comes to a policy on a hot-button issue that seems like it could easily be enforced selectively, I don't think it's a stretch to be concerned about whether the one who crafts and enforces the policy for a project that's supposed to be open having a track record of being the cause of the issues supposedly that make the policy "sensible".
Intentional rather than self-inflicted.
Not sure how common this understanding of the terms is, but to me, those terms don't seem conflicting.
But they are different terms.
If you're not already aware that two different descriptors can both accurately describe something even if they're not synonyms, I'm not sure how to help you. What I originally said was accurate, and no amount of other accurate terminology will change that.
Why would I be unaware of that?
One is that Sun/Oracle made an honest mistake with the license (self-inflicted). The other is that they regretted that Java was ever open source and so made the license and other processes around Java as annoying as possible while still being technically open source.