Excellent, thanks for that link! The argument seems to rest entirely on the shoulders of "NIH prevents them from ever touching your source". I very very very

Excellent, thanks for that link! The argument seems to rest entirely on the shoulders of "NIH prevents them from ever touching your source". I very very very much don't believe this, especially if they know they're competing with you. Even if they don't use it directly (because, lets face it, it's probably crap for their precise needs), they can learn a lot from looking at it, for a lot lower cost than what you paid to discover it. It's the same thing as arguing copyrights / patents are entirely useless for the holder because nobody who competes with you would ever even consider looking at what you're doing. How is this not nonsense? The main (loud) complaints about e.g. patents revolve around them working too well for this purpose, giving too much of an advantage to the first mover, and suppressing others from using what is otherwise valuable to them.