Tim O'Reilly comments on the same side as my earlier "Protectionism, bah!" and "The Bill of Rights says nothing about free code." posts. It hearkens back to Tim's
(re)definition of Freedom Zero:
My biggest beef with Microsoft is not that it offers proprietary software, but that it uses anticompetitive tactics and its monopoly position to take away my right to use non-Microsoft software through the introduction of deliberate incompatibilities and other roadblocks. If Freedom Zero for developers is the freedom to offer software on whatever terms the developer sets and a user will accept; Freedom Zero for users is the right to choose whatever software they like, without interference from platform vendors who try to deny that choice.