I would also like to see an example of "Corporate Libre Software", not to say that there isn't any, but at the moment I can't think of any examples.
zapper may be referring to software which is licensed under e.g. GPL v2 or v3, but is either partially or entirely corporate backed and/or developed, but I wouldn't term this "libre" software.
Corporations don't necessarily always opt for permissive licensing when developing free code. They may use the GPL licenses for a very specific reason for a certain project, as they want to harness and abuse the viral nature of GPL. In some cases a permissive licence is not just the "best" option for such projects, but it's a necessity, as they would rather "disown" the code and just put it out there, than deal with all the GPL entanglement pitfalls. In certain other cases, using GPL means your competitor(s) can't reuse the code without making all of their changes and additions available under the same license - so licensing GPL makes more sense, than e.g. ISC, MIT or 2 clause BSD, where you're effectively just giving the code away.
In other examples the license becomes almost irrelevant due to the a hideously complex code base, bespoke build system and an overall design which makes portability next to impossible.
Many large projects, such as Android, were designed in such as way that the GPL parts (the kernel some other elements) are deliberately masked from the rest of the OS, by LGPL and permissive licensed code.. If you read the earlier presentations on Android's design, it's all in there.
3 bullet pointed mission objectives for bionic libc and look at the first one:
https://image.slidesharecdn.com/android … 33-638.jpg
https://web.archive.org/web/20160408053 … ndroid.pdf