I have to object to that. I work for a company which pays him to build branded versions of FUSE for macOS, and has been doing so for several years.
He does reliably ship us new builds, but it has sometimes been a little difficult to get him to respond to feature requests or even patches that we send him.
I don't believe that he is scaling much better with his commercial licensing than he was as a FLOSS maintainer.
As it is, we're fairly happy with his work to continue to support new versions of macOS, which is fairly hard to ship systems software on these days (the code signing and notarization requirements keep getting more and more onerous, system integrity protection keeps getting in the way of debugging, and so on), but it would be nice if we weren't limited to a single person working on the project.
I'd really rather he kept the project open source, and continued to provide custom builds for companies on a contract basis. Due to the difficulties of building and signing the kernel extension across all of the versions of macOS that it supports, just having the source available but keeping the binaries under a proprietary license would probably be sufficient to make it worth the while of most companies to license with him to provide custom builds like we do.