There's a famous essay about the Tragedy of the Commons -- the high level idea is that if there is a resource that is commonly available for free then some users will exploit it for their own gain. It originally referred to ranchers who would overuse communal grazing lands, but I think the lessons apply equally well to open source as well.

In my opinion, a healthy open source ecosystem relies on people using and contributing back, supporting the distributed creators that make the ecosystem possible. This historically has been something of a gift economy or social contract, but it's become wildly distorted by companies (e.g. Amazon/AWS) attempting to overuse the commons resource and make profit from it.

So it comes as no surprise that when one rancher comes in and overgrazes the common resource, the other participants might want to make some changes in rules. These new licenses aren't "just because", they come from lived experience of entities like Amazon coming in an exploiting a shared resource.

And I get it, the letter of the law says, "Do whatever you want with this shared resource". And there are plenty of folks who believe that Amazon has done nothing wrong -- the rules allowed for overgrazing, so naturally the right thing for Amazon to do was to overgraze.

I personally see it differently -- Amazon is hiding behind the letter of the licenses and totally distorting a community, exploiting the gifts of the engineers' labor, and getting us to point our fingers at one another over the "one true definition of 'Open Source'" rather than constructively figuring out ways to protect the community of open development and reward the individual workers who volunteer their time.