It's like the alternator. It requires electrical excitement before it will produce electricity. But, once excited, and using the energy from the engine, it will produce more electricity than what was required to excite it.
As technical lead on the project I can determine that the best way to support the product is to introduce libraries or source code that makes the application more stable and or perform better. If I determine that open source code is the best course to take and I introduce it to the product's code base, would that require the whole product to be open sourced? Could the clients running the application required the source be opened?
So let's say I work for a company that has software used by a few fairly large financial institutions and my company wants to kill that software in favor of something..."else". The net result is that the customers are under heavy pressure to purchase the "else", and I'm going to be out of a job. Can I plant some open source libraries or source code into the product, sit back for a while, then demand the company release the rest of the product as open source?
It's seems like all this article and comments are doing is dancing around the real issue. Amazon provides a pretty good service, but it's being attacked. It's like calling a car unreliable when thieves have stolen the wheels.
I'm becoming increasingly frustrated by the lack of effort being made to identify the attacker(s) and take appropriate action(s) against them.