The default copyright stance, unless a licence specifies otherwise, is "All Rights Reserved". I don't think we have the right to enforce a licence that is all about freedom unless a user opts-in.
Of course we have. When a user obtains an account on the toolserver he effectively enters contract with Wikimedia Deutschland. Of course licensing can be tied to that. How can you suggest otherwise?!
Closed source software can be as good as open source software - do remember that. And closed source software doesn't have to be commercial. While (imo) WM-DE should support free and open source
This is _completely_ besides the point. Please do not make this a heise-forum-style idiology debate. There are purely pragmatic reasons for free licensing here: 1) avoiding dying tools when maintainers leave. 2) fostering synergies through code sharing
Of course you can take the stance to say "just write the tool again". What a waste of time! Developer resources should be values higher than this.