Technically if I sold my company that is a redistribution according to the GPL. The buyer would be forced to give away the asset for free which is why the lawyers I met do not like it.
I am not saying I like EULa's from MS but I was making a point. I can link to com objects in a crappy VB written program but still can sell it. MS has no problem with this at all as long as I paid for their software properly to make it.
What if for example I use a GPL api call for printf (making this one up) but make everything else in house and spent millions. I want to sell my company. Am I freeloading as now the whole product goes GPL as it counts as a redistribution? I know viral sounds offensive, but it is what RMS wanted to end proprietary software.
I think Apache, Xorg, FreeBSD, Samba, node.js, and others do well for BSD/MIT licenses. We got PF sense, Juniper, Early Cisco IOS, MacOSX, Windows share and printer support for mac/linux users, and can now use Visual Studio community edition for odd things like Android and node.js development. No you did not misread that as MS code editor is cross platform and even runs on Linux thanks to BSD licensed code.
I think everyone wins and yes some capitalism is nice for progress in addition of academia and community.