That may be true, but one of the key ideals in science is that the findings are reproduceable. If I can't reproduce it, it's helpful for the science to be fairly specific, in case the findings depended on details that were thought to be unimportant, but we later find out were critical. The most interesting science comes in unexpected results.

I feel it's like a piece of closed source software releasing "the source code" and yet no one can make it compile. You don't have to have a clean codebase, it can be a bit tricky to build, but it has to be able to be compiled before anyone can have any confidence in your claims. If you don't provide that, it's much less useful.

The separate issues of for profit labs and what support they should expect in this context are tough issues, but we shouldn't undermine the science to thwart them.