Can't it be both? At the time when the 777 was being created, Mulally was the director of engineering for the project.
Some corporate executives worked to get where they are today.
Most software that returns results from/sends queries to an outside source is opt-in. You're asked on installation if you want to send anonymous usage statistics to improve later versions of <software_package> You're asked if you want to send a crash report to <software_vendor>.
Even Microsoft is asking you what search providers you want to use when you first run IE. How difficult would it be during the ubuntu installation to ask "Do you want to include results from Amazon in dash searches?" and only install the package if the box is ticket? Like Debian does with popcon?
Why Opt-in Marketing Matters. Point 1.b in the comparison in this short article seems to apply perfectly to what RMS is saying.
If Unix ownership is going to be transferred to anyone, it should be transferred to someone who actually has some interest in Unix. IBM(AIX), HP(HP-UX), Oracle(Solaris)...
At least at one time, Novell had some hand in the game, as a co-developer of UnixWare.
Linux, as has been mentioned many, many times, is not Unix. There is no reason any of those organizations would or should be interested in ownership of something that doesn't benefit them in the slightest. It just doesn't make any sense.
Real computer scientists don't comment their code. The identifiers are so long they can't afford the disk space.