I do not speak according to my convictions, but based on facts.

I develop my comments:

On this link, http://wiki.maemo.org/Why_the_closed_packages, we can see 4 important reasons: keep exclusivity software, IPR & licensing issues, security and third party software.

Look closer:

Keep exclusivity software: this is not required to sell a great many unit. The HTC G1 is an evidence: 1 million of unit sell in USA with not-exclusive Operating Système (Android). And there exist other examples (but we will not list them all, it would take too much space). I'll add that the N900 is an exclusivity to himself: there is not exist a mobile PC equivalent today.

IPR & licensing issues: The risk of having patents on technologies include in Maemo 5 is the same for present proprietary elements than for elements already FOSS. For example: The kernel Linux may also contain elements protected by patents or licenses unauthorized. In addition, SCO seems saved to the bankrupt, so they could try attack Nokia for using the Linux kernel. Yet Nokia uses the Linux kernel in Maemo 5.

Security: Well, Nokia sees us like children? We are enough responsible to realize that if we change the power management and it no works, is our fault.

Third party software: Here is the only valid explanation. Whatever elements proprietary of third party, as Adobe Flash and other codecs, can be proposed to install to the user when they need it rather than include them. As in Ubuntu.

So in the end, 1/4 of explanations are valid.

There exist another valid explanation for some drivers: If understanding how functioning a driver can understand the functioning, and therefore facilitates the copying, of an electronic component, it may be understandable.

But that, they don't speak about this in this link.

So why Nokia make it so?

An error of Nokia?

Especially if Nokia releases its work under the GPL, the problem announced by Qgil turns into an advantage and everyone will gain benefits: Nokia, the community of Maemo, Maemo OS and Maemo OS users.