Modified open source licenses with attribution clauses are not open source.

Can you see the source? Are you free to use it and distribute it? Sounds like Open-Source to me.

It remains open source until you compile the source (= closed source).

What?? monsieurgerard, that's not really how it works...

Software keeps its open source quality even when it's compiled. Otherwise, noone would be using any, unless you're only using it to learn.

You can see the source? Fine, that's something Microsoft calls shared source. You can modify it, distribute it (even the modified version). Then we're getting closer to open source as defined by the OSI. But there are a few rules to follow. At least if you want the OSI approval. Problem is, open source never got trademarked (it was too late) so today, people are calling whatever they want open source. Earlier today, I read about "open source worship", I kid you not.

I was happy with the Free software name. As it stands today, we got two competing expressions for basically the same thing. Try to find free software that isn't open source, or vice versa. Go ahead.

If one requires a prominently displayed badge shouldn't they also provide this for all the library, applications, and components they're building on. With a little research one would discover the berkeley advertisement license which demonstrated this kind of NASCAR-esque license.