Yes, those years are accurate, but the history is longer.
I got into this around 1994, but then just as a bystander. I think the Debian team had to work out a lot of stuff throughout the late 90-ties, so, DFSG was the end point of that work. It had been really practical from 1993, even though there wasn’t much tension then. The tension arouse once Linux took off.
But Debian wasn’t the first distro, there was a few coming up in 1992, but that too wasn’t where it started, there was a clear need for a definition of Free Software that came in 1986. That, I assert, was actually the starting point that went into the OSD. And that too has seen many revisions.
Going further back, the FSD that was based on the GNU Manifesto from 1983, which was already pretty elaborate on what was Free Software and what wasn’t. And before that, the Berkeley Software Distribution from 1978, that carries a very permissive license. Around the same time, it was controversy between the Homebrew Computer Club and Micro Soft, the latter of which had a bunch of guys who thought that their contribution was greater than everyone elses. And before that, in 1971, Donald Knuth came to my alma mater carrying the first volumes of the Art of Computer Programming, and wishing to do further work on the SIMULA compiler, but the Norwegian research council at the time imposed terms that were unheard of and unacceptable to Knuth.
And I bet there is more.
So, certainly, the OSD was based on a long, long body of knowledge on actual tension around different practices around acceptable terms.
And AI is supposed to change everything. I guess it will, and I guess it is the reason why we have tension, but the key here is to understand what is it with this long history we should heed, and what is so different that we need further work.