I think I might have to disagree with both of the statements that you made.
First and foremost, Open Source doesn’t mean it’s free (free as in beer to reference the great Richard Stallman). It means that you have unhindered access to the source code, and depending on licensing (yes please pay attention to licenses), you might have freedom to copy, distribute, sell, etc. The benefit of that is that it’s difficult for an open source tool/code to just disappear from the market. You know, once on internet, always on internet.
Now, packages that are wrapped into DLLs don’t necessarily have to be closed sourced. I certainly use that mode of development for the archi-lab.net package and it’s still open source: https://github.com/ksobon/archilab So are my Mandrill, Mantis Shrimp and Bumblebee packages. They all use DLLs for parts of their functionality yet remain open source. The only thing that a DLL file does is obfuscates the access to the source as it’s not direct. Check the documentation for the package and you might find that its source is still available.
Of course, yes, there are packages that use the compiled DLLs not just for ease of development and enhanced functionality, but also for privacy, and they are not open source. What’s wrong with that? Appreciate the fact that they were made available to you at no cost, while there was a significant cost in time, and money for the developer maintaining the package. This doesn’t hinder the open source community around Dynamo at all. If anything it’s just a sign of a healthy community, because it now attracts professional developers that are concerned about their IP rights, and deem their code commercially valuable. Chances are that it might be some good code. And, if they are asking to be paid to make that package available? So what? It’s their right. It sure as hell was their time they spent building the package in the first place. Would you work for me for free? Probably not, why do you expect others to do that for you?
As is right now, I haven’t personally seen a Dynamo package “for sale”, but I am sure they will pop-up. I have no problem with that, and it comes from a guy that developed 4 open source packages for free. People engage in the open source community for different reasons, me, nor you, and especially not Autodesk should be in position to stop them from doing what they are comfortable with.
Selling packages would by no means curtain collaboration. We might have different definitions about what collaboration is. I for example would say that you are quite a poor performer in the collaboration category because I have never seen you contribute code back to one of my free and open source packages. That’s my definition of collaboration, but others might have a different one and consider being active in the forum, reporting bugs etc. means that they are great collaborators. Both are valid points of view. Just to close this out, I will give you an example. Python is an open source programming language. Should that mean that no one should be allowed to build a great tool or service using Python and sell it? Try telling that to Google. Their entire platform is built on it. You probably have Gmail, or Google Drive, or used Google Maps, Google earth… Wouldn’t that make your argument cynical if not outright ignorant?
I am by no means calling you cynical nor ignorant, just trying to make a point.