Companies stand to turn a profit. OSS is here to help enable that or push the goal posts. It’s not a charity unless the org feels charitable. Sure, non-profits exist but they were never one of those.
I'm interpreting it as closer to pity, rather than genuine criticism =)
Not all f/oss contributors are anticapitalist zealots like the FSF, as evidenced by the huge popularity of permissive licenses such as MIT.
There’s nothing implicit about it. The licenses are explicit legal documents.
In what way are they?
'The term "free" is used in the sense of "free speech", not "free of charge"'
It would be helpful for everyone if that community would pause before contributing to code bases with licenses which allow for that. MIT, BSD, Apache, …
It would be helpful for them because they’ll know what they’re getting into. For us because we won’t have to see this tragedy unfold time and time again. And for all open source users because more efforts will be directed towards programs with licenses that protect end users. GPL, AGPL, …
It will be a little worse for companies seeking free labor. A price I’m willing to pay.
More like a company took advantage of a community that expected their freely offered labor to not be commercialized at any point in time without making available said works in a fully free vector as well, as that's an implicit expectation behind "open source".