One of the most compelling reasons to move from a Windows based environment today, for businesses, is to get away from expensive, awkward and confusing licensing fees. Some of the key differentiators for bringing Linux into a business environment include stability, price and lack of licensing. The addition of license fees will virtually kill two of those differentiators. As for the third, MS has a great marketing department and the Win2K release wasn't bad for businesses. The less key differentiators Linux has, the less likely it will be deployed in mass. It may technically be a better choice, but business will drive the purchase.
These vendors need to find another means of differentiating themselves to make money to support the business as well as development. Namely: Training, Design Services, Deployment Services, Custom Development, Application Building, etc...
Linux users are notoriously cheap and to think that the techies will pay license fees is absolutely ridiculous. Take Loki as an example. Probably the only real Linux Game Developer out there, and out of business because they charged for their products. Techies will find another distro, or take the last free release and either keep it or build on it themselves. Don't expect much in the form of payment from your average techie linux user. The money must come from business, and the key is differentiated services.
What would I prefer?
Drive development to key on the business server and workstation market and make linux more mainstream. Generate revenue from business.
Will I pay a license fee? No
Will I let them go bankrupt? If they don't offer any differentiators for the license, hell yes.
Will I donate money? Yes. Only if I know exactly where it is going and what it will be used for.