One aspect of open vs closed source that no one seems to have touched on so far is Corporate Perception.

I heard a saying a long time ago "Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM" I guess you could put "Microsoft" in the place of "IBM" these days?

The perceived notion is that "closed source" is contractually guaranteed whereas open source is not, therefore "must be inferior"

I would point out that IMHO and my experience, the "perception" of a CEO is reality, as far as we are concerned. They think they can sue, so they go for that option. I know this is BS, but how many CEOs do you know of who are aware of what "EULA" stands for? let alone read all the small print. At best you might get your money back..............no consequential losses, compensation for loss of earnings etc.

I have had very little success in getting freeware/shareware accepted in the workplace for exactly the same reason.

Basically if I said "Sun Solaris" they would say "Good idea Johnno" if I said "Linux", they would say "Johnno, you have been on the beer again"

Just a few thoughts

Cheers