Ok, we s/source/core/'d the title above since that use of "open source" is disputed. But I wish you had omitted this:
> It's pretty much straight up corporate dishonesty
That's uncharitable and on the wrong side of the HN guideline against name-calling. Please err on the other side instead. In addition to making the community more civil, it will make your arguments stronger; as for example your last sentence was the stronger argument here.
A more charitable comment would also not have spoken of "the" definition of open-source, a notoriously protean term.