Re: "Having given the world our software on the most liberal of terms..."
Shirley though, aside from splitting hairs over American neologisms, you'd agree that describing it as "the most liberal terms" is, well, silly, given it is intentionally and explicitly designed to be more restrictive than other licenses?
As for *aaS, I'm talking about the whole business practice, not just the physical act of distribution. Almost no one builds software to either sell or to run any more. Most software companies now fully intend to shift their software through some combination of perpetual licensing, subscription based on-premise licensing and cloud-based subscription licensing. Aside from the obvious copyleft requirements in the "distributive" modes, it's not even that well established where those requirements end (e.g. define "distributing"). And it's impossible to say that just because you're not "distributing" the software today doesn't mean you won't tomorrow.
That's part of the reason why the GPL has fallen so out of favour with newer projects, which is kind of my point - today's devs don't like the GPL, so it should come as no surprise those people paid to contribute to GPL projects are uncomfortable with their own employers being sued over it.