Some people genuinely have a problem with it.
But I’m convinced that the majority of it is just: It’s embarrassing (and therefore costs social capital) to defend it.
So therefore: If you attach it to something else you want to attack, you just gave yourself a strategic advantage.
This analysis is spot-on. I especially think you’re onto something with your reference to the commons. (Edit: The generative AI movement could be a seen as a modern reincarnation of enclosure)
These guys think of a commons in a sense of ownership: if I own something, I can do whatever I want with it.
But the real historical examples of a commons are more like a mutual obligation. It’s a relationship, not a delivery of inert goods. Yes, you get access to the benefits of the commons, but that comes hand-in-hand with accepting the duty to care for the commons as an ongoing entity.
That’s what really irks me about all of this. They didn’t “steal” something. They killed a collective organism.
Perpetual loop of “bounty encourages bad reports”, “canceled bounty”, “bug reports improve”, “bounty comes back”, “bounty encourages bad reports”…