But you are free (not in the monetary sense) to modify and redistribute Waterhole, you just have to abide by what's stated in the licence.
So, in the case of redistribution, you're free to do that, provided that you pay Waterhole for every licence that you give out.
Section 6 of the Waterhole licence
(e) a Licensee or Authorised User making the Software available to third parties via a Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) offering, provided that a separate Production Licence is purchased for each separate project or separate client.
Then that is not the open source by definition.
https://opensource.org/osd
I understand what you want to say but that's "source-available" not "open source". Technically in literal sense open-source can mean that as well. But in the last 20-30 years, common meaning of open source is what I am claiming.
Basically, as Waterhole becomes more popular, more people will notice this. Heck some will even begin using it because they think it's "the open-source" not "an open-source"
Please check those two Wiki links few posts above which explain it well.
Here is the already discussed topic with the Waterhole dev.
https://www.reddit.com/r/laravel/comments/13q35as/waterhole_modern_laravelpowered_community_forum/jlcoq6j/