a) rare
b) likely to be making a commercial product, in which case the main competitor to WinFSP isn't Dokan(y), but CBFS.
The author of Expandrive could probably add more to this - his product is based off CBFS.
BTW, I am not really trying to make WinFsp into a product. I simply created it because I am a file system writer myself and wanted a stable FSD for Windows.
I was originally planning to put it under the BSD, but I spent too much time and effort to simply give it away.
Unfortunately for you, you will not fix the problem if you don't change the way you're thinking about commercial products and FOSS on Windows. If this can help you to understand the environment: almost all Dokany contributors are using it for commercial purpose, remember that it was also your case and so is my personal case btw.
Let me explain the license choice (even if it was decided by the previous maintainer, I would have done the same choices here): we use LGPL license for the core/library so it can be used freely on commercial app while we still protect ourselves on unpublished core modification, and MIT license for additional programs (control, samples...) because these doesn't matter and this way it can be used as a starting point for developers.
I believe this is what people are expecting on Windows (FOSS on MAC is generally worth from my experience ^^) ; but of course this means giving it to companies making business on your work. It's part of the deal. I completely understand your position as I'm also using AGPL license for other open source projects I started years ago and for those I didn't want companies to use it freely.
Philosophically, to be open source is already a great decision, then the license decision is yours according to your way of thinking for your project.
For me the AGPL in itself would be an "absolutely not", and combined with the point two bullets below that, on the grounds that "hey I'm doing work but he's getting money" that just adds insult to injury.