How about that: Open source, he said, creates a license "so that nobody can ever improve the software," he claimed, bemoaning the squandered opportunity for jobs and business.
If by "improve" he means creating a mediocre clone of an existing and successful product, leveraging a monopolistic position to wreck the original, and then go through a long process of incremental improvement on the clone until it is objectively better that what was available 20 years ago (and selling every milestone along the way)... then I guess he's more or less right.