> Let's say I buy a text editor from a bankrupt company. I take that code and incorporate it into my main product. You can buy the text editor separately, it just costs 20k (same as my main product.) Is that "operating it?"

No, that’s operating a different product from the one customers of the bankrupt entity paid for. “Operating it” would mean stuff like decoupling the text editor from any service required to run it - like an extension server - by making just enough code open source to allow other users to run their own extension registries and updating the text editor binaries to allow setting custom endpoints. The acquirer can keep the rest of the code closed sourced and integrate it into their own products all they want. They can even stop updating the editor all together after they’re done fulfilling the requirements. The courts can decide where reasonableness ends with consumers in mind.

Honestly this seems like an intentionally obtuse example in a thread about a medical hardware product.

> Alternatively this asset is encumbered by these rules so no-one wants it, it gets Open Sourced. Creditors lose out on potential revenue to recover their losses.

Creditors lose out to higher priority creditors all the time. The #1 creditor should be the consumers who bought the products and have no protection otherwise (or maybe second only to unpaid employees).

> Now let's assume the code base is 'large'. Maybe it contains licensed 3rd party code (shipped as source) maybe not. Someone has to check. Who's owning that someone to do the check? If the check misses code, and proprietary Google code gets released. Who will Google sue? (Hint: everyone)

Binary blobs are fine for licensed code. That’s not new or radical (and even Windows is source available to the right customers). Licenses only extend far enough to allow the existing consumers to operate their devices. Besides, how would anyone acquire the IP without the components it licenses?

> The suggestion is flawed because it fundamentally changes the way assets are handled in bankruptcy. Or declares code not to be an asset (which in turn has unwelcome side effects.)

Yeah, I’m suggesting changes to bankruptcy and consumer protection laws. That goes with the territory.