It's not really clear to my why they want the OSI approval (see here for their argument on the point [opensource.org]). They are free to use whatever license they want, they don't need the approval of the OSI, and yet they paid lawyers to help get OSI approval.
The license itself goes against the OSI standard [opensource.org] (as I see it), because it restricts the way the software can be used. That is, certain products cannot be built using source code with this license.
Context (Score:5, Insightful)
The context of the resignation seems to be in response to being called out:
And the "FUD" in question was this (further down, in response to Bradley Kuhn siding with Bruce):
I'm inclined to say I agree with the call-out.
Re:Context (Score:5, Insightful)
The license itself goes against the OSI standard [opensource.org] (as I see it), because it restricts the way the software can be used. That is, certain products cannot be built using source code with this license.