I don't necessarily disagree with your argument. I disagree with it being falsely advertised as free software.
However, at a minimum I do believe that provisions should be made for: a) the stakeholders to be able to "fire" Steemit Inc. and hire a different developer or developers (I'm not suggesting this is realistic or desired now, instead I am considering the future); and b) the stakeholders to be able to continue to develop and maintain the software at all (including any necessary hard or soft forks) should Steemit Inc. cease doing so for whatever reason.
Failing to recognize that free software allows this and the current non-free license does not, and failing to remedy this flaw means that the value of the blockchain is impaired. Investors discount future possibilities and the possibility that Steemit Inc. as an entity could be someday be corrupted, coopted, or otherwise fail to act in the interests of the stakeholders, or that the code could be thrown in a sort of legal limbo as abandonware are perhaps-small but looming storm clouds with respect to the value of the token, and notably clouds that don't threaten other competing free-software blockchains.
Interesting I didn't think about this. What you say is that the license prevents even steem to fork if steemit inc disagree ? If this is the case then the license should definetely be removed at some points when steem has gained enough momentum/adoption.
It is somewhat ambiguous how it would apply in that situation, but at a minimum when it comes to being left in legal limbo that is not a good thing.