Arguably selling support/services to a company using that product would help pay for developers that work on the product, which to me sounds like a benefit.

With the AGPL that would require dual licensing, and that draws flak as well.

I think the notion that OSS means there cannot be any money involved simply cannot hold true anymore these days. Software has become extremely complex and requires dedicated developers working on it - and they need to eat.

We are currently seeing a lot of companies changing their licensing model for a reason - because there is not currently a middle ground between OSS and a working business modell that the OSS crowd doesn't hate.

That being said, I'd love to be proven wrong here!

There are corps which have a (close to) blanket ban on AGPL, but still submit patches to open source projects. HP would be one of them.

I don't think it's a big loss though.