Would you like to elaborate, if you disagree with my statement? Of course it was very shortened, because the point of my post was an entirely different one.
If you want a longer version: open source software under the normal licenses give you irrevocable rights to use it, as it is open source, you can also administrate it. You have full control over it. That was the core of my statement. Additionally, European authors are major contributors to many of this software. So in what exactly do you disagree with me?
Yet most contributions to biggest FOSS projects like Linux, LLVM etc come from US corpos and institutions. Non-US actors may leverage them, but control over those projects is in hand of US actors, even if letters describing the license doesn't state that, because power in real world doesn't reside in license files or even commit stats.
Yes, in theory Europe (let's ignore there is no such political entity as Europe, but people pretend there is) could hard-fork them and maintain it, but in practice it won't happen, because if it could, it would already.
There is the EU as a political entity covering large parts of Europe. But here Europe can easily mean the same as "not the US".
There are plenty of Linux forks. Which are maintained independently. In the moment it becomes relevant, any of them could be used in an instant. There is Debian, There is Suse. There is no lack of international Linux variants.
If you want a longer version: open source software under the normal licenses give you irrevocable rights to use it, as it is open source, you can also administrate it. You have full control over it. That was the core of my statement. Additionally, European authors are major contributors to many of this software. So in what exactly do you disagree with me?