It’s the same old song, that you’ve mentioned on this blog before: there are three arms on this triangle. The government, commerical interests and, importantly and not insignificantly, the tax-paying public who funded the work and could also create value-added products. Mr Kapeleris seems to be in that camp who only acknowledge the first two groups. The other 20+ million people don’t seem to matter.

Ironically, as you note, his hypothesis is sound; he just doesn’t seem to understand what it means. Market-driven usage is a great idea and definitely a key component. Isn’t the same as, and doesn’t require, lock-in, however. I was in a reasonable mood until I read this. Now I’m annoyed. Thanks for pointing it out.