If you repackage my software and are better at marketing it than me, but you build vendor lock in into the code and a million people end up beholden to you as a consequence, did my code help bring people freedom?
Nope. Your software didn't affect their freedom in any way (either positive or negative).
That's exactly the problem. Imagine if all free software used non-copyleft licenses, with various companies simply extending the functionality of the free, base software. The users have to either choose seriously inferior free software, or use software that restricts their freedom. What you've basically achieved is giving away free labour with almost no benefit to the end-users. It'd help stop companies reinventing the wheel, but that's about it.
Releasing source should be required. It's a public safety concern that it is not.
What part of a text only (Notepad, for example) editor affect public safety ?
Who knows? Without the source code of the text editor, it would be impossible to tell. Your text editor could be sending whatever you type to some random company and you'd be completely oblivious to it. That's a privacy concern rather than a safety concern, but the point is that without the source code, you can't tell what something's doing.
Besides, by that logic, DRM would be perfectly acceptable, so long as it wasn't in text-editors. ;-)
