​The definition of "open infrastructure" (or the software component of open infrastructure) should include an explicit requirement for open-source code.​ Even an explicit recommendation short of a requirement would be better than the current definition, which is entirely silent the value of opening the code. The Elsevier acquisition of bepress (to use one example among many) would have been much less harmful to the community if the code had been open and user institutions could hold on to the platform, fork it if they wanted, take it in their own direction, and continue using it without becoming Elsevier customers.