I think the question is meant to mean "Should my company open the source of its software?" But for me, answering the question as asked provides the path to ans

I think the question is meant to mean "Should my company open the source of its software?" But for me, answering the question as asked provides the path to answering the question as reworded. To me, the question as asked is about the nature of the software the company uses, not sells. I personally will always choose an open source product over the alternative, even if I happily pay for support or just donate to support the project. Unfettered access to the source is fundamental to me, even for software I never intend to alter. I know this seems to many like an extremist position. But I don't like the idea that I am not allowed to tear down my microwave or doorknob or transmission. I might never be able to put them back together in working order. Or I might be able to find a gear with a missing tooth and execute a $2 repair instead of a $90 replacement. Or I might invent a new frakenstein microwave with a tranmission. Extending the featureset of a web server or understanding why my plugin is crashing the host app, etc. are important to me. I think they are important to society. So I hold on to my open source extremism. If you show me the hottest new tiny web server that can do HTTPS/4 with built-in AI in just 5Kb, I will be intrigued, but if it isn't open source, I'll stick with my current stack. With this mindset, the software I produce is open source. And sometimes people pay me for it.