It is one of the big enough projects that companies actually pay for their own devs to develop it. And they lose little by providing those changes to others. I think reality is that you need that sort of scale for it to work.
> And they lose little by providing those changes to others.
I am unsure about this. Some Linux patches can be of high value, say better TCP congestion control. By releasing such patches, others can get them for free while it took you significant effort.
In practice, due to Linux's lack of internal stable API and fast pace of changes, Linux makes it painful to keep private patches, so there is incentive to contribute upstream. Differently engineered software project can make it easy to keep private patches. In other words, Linux uses technical methods to compel contribution instead of legal methods.
> Some Linux patches can be of high value, say better TCP congestion control.
Every significant piece of code can be high value. But keeping it in the open brings more value to the world at large.
Open source projects do not force you to contribute. You can keep your improvements to yourself if you're so inclined, and patch your copy or products (if the license allows).
I believe the value lies in the developer itself. Not in the code. It's just an instance of development, and if the developer is that brilliant, they can always develop things of same high quality.
