> The article recalls people that open-source software is not necessary created for the community, but rather by the author, for the author oftentimes.

Exactly. A FLOSS license essentially states "I put together this cool thing, please take a look and pass around."

When I published FLOSS projects of my own, my motivation was to share with the world something that was useful to me and that I enjoyed doing, in case it was of any use to anyone. Once I discovered a small FLOSS project of mine was used by a big name commercial software suite and I was tremendously surprised for finding out by googling it, and found it extremely funny. And that was it. Is this so outlandish?