A few people have asked about my take on this. If you're curious, here goes:

It's really an interesting dilemma. I've been watching the Bitaxe model b/c it's a good test case for FOSH and how the incentives realistically play out. SeedSigner and Bitaxe are fundamentally different b/c the components to make a SeedSigner are genuinely "off the shelf" and can be used for a variety of other things individually before, or even to some extent after, assembly. The board that makes up a Bitaxe, and the ASIC chip(s) that go into it, conversely can basically only be used for one thing, which creates a different set of dynamics.

The concept of a "legit reseller" network is interesting too, b/c it seems like a reasonable way to provide some kind of support to those writing the software and designing the hardware, but it ultimately relies on social consensus as an enforcement mechanism. Maybe thats enough to make it work, or maybe not if divergence from the consensus of "we should all buy from the legit network even though it's more expensive" becomes the norm.

But even if Bitaxe did had a more restrictive license that was still open but required licensing fees, as China demonstrates every day, there's virtually no way to legally enforce this on the international stage, even if you wanted to. Apple can't even eliminate infringement of its legal protections for hardware/software, and they're practically in bed with the Chinese government. This is why most hardware ends up being closed source b/c if the bar to produce the hardware is too low, it becomes a race to the bottom in terms of retail price.

A key part of the whole formula is the "cool" factor and the FOSH values messaging that comes from Bitaxe.

On a global/international scale, the evidence here (even with the individual in question being described as a "bitcoiner" presumably sharing some of the values that comes with that) is that it seems the social consensus falls apart b/c of divergent motivations. But maybe the social consensus doesn't have to be completely global to still extract enough value to support ongoing development, maybe some amount of value leakage is acceptable at it all still can work.

@skot9000 deservers widespread support and admiration b/c he's seemingly really tried to do things the right way in terms of both the open source and the bitcoin ethos; beyond that we'll just have to see where things land.