This just makes me weep. The Defective by Design campaign team are urging people to book slots at the Apple in-store "Genius Bar" to ask probing questions which they already know the answer to about their company policy on DRM and Free software. The 'Genius Bar' is an official Apple support avenue for their customers, and is a service provided inside many of their stores.
Defective by Design is an FSF initiative, setup in 2006 to target 'Big Media' companies which use DRM (Digital Rights Management) in their hardware and software to enforce the rights of copyright holders, and as a by-product restrict the rights of the consumer. The FSF is a donor supported charity which seeks to 'promote computer user freedom and to defend the rights of all free software users'.
The FSF attend conferences where their members attempt to recruit new members/donators and sell apparel, stickers and so on to fund their activities. I've seen them a couple of times at conferences I've attend and - based on the discussion with the guy on the stand, and the literature provided - I have considered donating to them. One stumbling block for me has always been the cost. It's quite expensive to become a member (their preferred option), but you can of course donate as little or as much as you like. So far I have donated zero.
This latest campaign by the Defective by Design group is the third activity that the FSF have undertaken in the last year or so which I disagree with, and will guarantee I'll never give them a penny. With their recent (and now moribund) Bad Vista campaign they focus on targetting one version of one operating system as the villan, with very little emphasis on the positive things Free Software gives users. They even leave the "What is free software?" 'Common Question' to the bottom of the front page!
More recently a member of the FSF joined the UK LUGMaster mailing list and kicked off a shitstorm by suggesting that all UK Linux User Groups (LUG) should change their names to GLUG - GNU Linux User Groups. The 'deal' was that if they did this, they'd get a link from an FSF site to their 'GLUG'. When one LUG agreed to this, the FSF member edited their wiki page to add (a ridiculous amount of) detail about GNU and the FSF. When that detail was moved off the front page to a separate page (making their front page more readable), the FSF representative withdrew the offer of a link and promptly left the mailing list.
I am a pragmatic Free software advocate. I would love to be able to run a completely Free Software house, but feel that right now, the totally Free desktop/laptop is not for me, so I use non-free video drivers, non-free network firmware - just like the vast majority of the world right now. One member of the FSF offered to send me an ethernet cable to resolve my broken wireless card when using Free software. I didn't see that as a solution, so instead I used Ubuntu with a non-free wireless-firmware based driver - which works.
Personally I use a lot of Free software and recommend others do the same. I support people who run Free software on their computers, donate to Debian, help make a podcast using only Free software, sponsor Free software events and generally do "my bit" to help foster a positive impression of Free software and the people who use and develop it.
It really feels like the FSF are undermining my efforts.
When the FSF come up with campaigns such as Bad Vista, Defective by Design and have members who have a near rabid insistence that Linux is called GNU/Linux, they create the impression that the only thing Free Software advocates can do is rubbish the competition and bitch to others who are doing good work in Free Software.
This is of course not true. Many of us are making great strides in getting Free Software on the desktop/laptop/server and in media players, mobile phones and other appliances. Clearly this isn't good enough for the FSF though, their approach is all or nothing. You're either with us as a Free software Zealot or you're against us. This is incompatible with my philosophy on life, so I'll be 'against' for now, and the foreseeable future.
Finally, I note in a recent mailing list posting on the subject of the Apple 'Genius Bar' campaign, Richard Stallman (of the FSF) claims that it isn't a real-life 'denial of service' on Apple. I wonder, how would the FSF feel if their support avenues were flooded by users of proprietary software, wasting their time asking questions about FSF policy.
Is this the absolute best the FSF can do with their charitable donations? Don't they have something better to do with their time?
Edit: Clearly I'm not alone in this:- neuro, mgdm, Pete, ZDnet, Slashdot.
Edit: According to Charity Navigator, at the end of their 2006 fiscal year, the FSF reported $832K in revenue, with expenses around $802K. How much did Defective by Design cost them? What else did they spend that on? Perhaps it's a time for an external review of the FSF and see if they really are working in the interests of the Free Software community.
FSF must be changed from inside
I read your article and agreed upon the most. But we need, as Sebastian put it, an organisation stands for certain principles.
The methods these particular FSF people displayed are however disgraceful. Period.
But in order to change the direction of any organisation one need to work within it. I understand that guys like you quite busy doing other thing and I think you should keep up the good work too. But rest of us who loves FOSS and want it to be spread could do a difference by joining in and work for a change within FSF.
My 2 Cents
I wholeheartedly agree with your statements, and would add that it's partially because of the mainstream distros (reluctant) support for proprietary binaries that so many people are now adopting free software, forcing hardware and software vendors to think again about which OS's they support, and paving the way for a completely free software desktop to exist in the future, compatible with ALL hardware, a stepping stone in the evolution if you will.
I'm sure many like myself want their PC to 'just work' and if it's a straight choice between Windows XP, and Gnewsense with missing wireless drivers and limited sound/graphics/flash support etc, then I'm sure the majority of people would have to opt for XP, and sadly this would probably include myself.
The way I see it is that a PC/Laptop without wireless/flash/sound/video drivers, is unsuitable for the majority of web users, and I can't see them flying off the shelves. It seems to me as though the FSF would rather we used Microsoft Windows, than install proprietary drivers or dare to call their operating system 'Linux'.
Please Note: I do accept that the correct name is GNU/Linux, and have no arguments with that fact at all (although in marketing terms, Linux is much friendlier to your average PC World consumer) but too much time is spent on this argument, time that could have been spent teaching a friend about free software, or fixing bugs!
Jonathan
Agreed
You've put into words what I've felt for a long time, well said.
You might want to check out a similar-ish situation
http://linuxlock.blogspot.com/
Lindependence was a huge success, but none of the "Big" FOSS advocates helped out, even after some claimed they would.
We do need someone to be uncompromising.
You call them fanatics. I say they are uncompromising. The FSF takes a stand and defines "free software" with a strict set of criteria. Thanks to this we have a vast amount of GPL software, instead of a mixed jumble of "by-nc", "only usable for the purpose foo in country x" and so on. I believe the GPL license has been much more important to FLOSS than any code the GNU project has written or initiated. And the GPL is all about uncompromising principles and philosophy, not a pragmatic "software that rocks".
I agree that some of the FSF campaigns give very simplistic messages. But perhaps shallow messages is important for reaching those without the patience to get the nuanced version of reality. I find it strange and bad that only the negative campaigns get their own domains and graphical design etc.
I respect the FSF for taking a stand in saying binary drivers is not free software.
I wish the FSF would see pragmatic distributions like Ubuntu as a justifiable means-to-an-end in creating a completely free OS.
FSF topic drift
I've been lamenting the Free Software Foundation's drift into promoting non-core-free-software licences and activity on Documentation, Web Services and DRM/TPM for a few years now. I've also noticed the democratic deficit of the FSF and other self-perpetuating campaign groups.
I suggest that the (imperfect but better) SPI-inc.org is a better organisation to support.
I've been installing free software on an Apple Mac recently, so I think I'll blog about this in the near future.
By the way, I'm told that you can earmark donations to FSF, so they can only spend it on the named project, because this is a basic feature of US charity like UK ones. Of course, it's cheaper/easier for FSF if you don't do that, so they don't encourage it.
The FSF can go a bit off the
The FSF can go a bit off the deep end, and never take into account the real world market situations, which makes their approaches seem a little funny sometimes. Companies revolving around technology exist (thankfully) and will not be going away soon. Is drm harmful? yes. should action be taken to stop it? I absolutely think so. I see this protest as a mildly rational response to an irrational technology. It is indeed, just a protest, no different than picketing [insert big bad company here] by calling for boycotts. Calling for no closed firmware may be a bit utopian, but protesting Apple DRM in this manner seems like a decent way to send the message they want to send.
The big problem, as MJ Ray
The big problem, as MJ Ray noted in the above post, is the apparent democracy deficit in organizations like FSF. The supporters -- be it individual open source developers, public or private organizations, commercial companies, and so on -- of the organization do not want to get associated with such measures; the replies to this blog post are a good example of this frustration (albeit inadequate to draw such conclusions).
The recent actions of FSF makes me sad in that if the apparent politization of the movement continues, I am personally forced to rethink my relationship to the organization and larger GNU movement. I have already done this monetarily, but continuation of extreme actions such as this will affect also software license choices made by me and my employer.
I am a nerd. I want software to be free. I have no interest in direct political action whatsoever.
Too right
Heh, rabid bloody zealots like the FSF are one of the reasons I'm just about impartial to all operating systems these days. Doesn't matter what camp you're in, you've got rabid zealots, software or functionality that doesn't work in ways that the other camps does. Doesn't matter what camp you're in, you're sacrificing your freedoms in some way.
Only way anyone is truly free is when they install/use whatever the hell they want, proprietary or 'free'. And regardless of what those zealots would like to say, restricting me from using proprietary software by manner of abuse or intimidation is not letting me excercise any form of 'freedom'
I'm over it. Just give me software that rocks. I don't care if I have to pay for it, or steal it. I don't care if I have to trample on someones unrealistic morals for it.
Agreed.
Well said, great post Al. Most of the time I applaud the FSF, but I agree that the tactics used in this latest campaign are appalling, shameful and an embarrassment to the community.
Agreed!
I can't agree more with your post. However, I see the benefit of some very focused campaigns (like Bad Vista), and I'd rather be within those campaigns when they happen locally to bring some balance into them than watch some of the FUD from a distance. One thing that bothers me is that there is so much space to create constructive, useful campaigns that bring positive criticism, yet the FSF and/or some of its members choose almost only guerrilla-style tactics to try and reach their goals. I personally think such approach negates the impact they could have as many people just dismiss anyone adopting such attitude.
On another subject, I've been tagged as an environmentalist fanatic many times for the simple fact I recycle as much as I can and try to reduce my consumer footprint as much as I can (such as refusing plastic bags). I think fanaticism is somewhat in the eye of the beholder (and depends highly on context). Think about it, recycling is still considered a highly revolutionary and disturbing concept in many parts of the world, as opposed to a completely normal (and part of daily routine) in others. Not saying I disagree with your opinion, but I understand those who won't "soften" their approach as they believe in it to the point they lose any civility or subtlety in their approach. When would you choose to be subtle about recycling ? I'd rather work closer than farther from them, which is why I am a member of the FSF since 2005.
I can understand the
I can understand the similarity between campaigning for Free Software causes and campaigning for more recycle facilities. They both seem "morally" right - if sometimes a little righteous. However I'd be willing to bet you don't attack non-recyclers in the same way that FSF attack proprietary software vendors.
+999999999
popey, you are entirely correct. This kind of action is *insane*.
The Free Software Foundation has ceased to be a positive force for change and become a tiresome entity that whinges incessantly about what other people aren't doing.
If they want to be relevant again, they can start using all the money they get from grants, awards and donations, and use it to hire developers or marketing people.
I suggest that the next time you see someone representing the FSF at a show or LUG meeting, you turn the tables and DoS them by asking them a bundle of pathetic and crass questions, such as why they haven't made something better than the ipod/iphone (they will suggest the freerunner, which is a pretty piss-poor alternative). Or why they are spending their money whining instead of creating/promoting free software.
I also note that Matt Lee's blog isn't exactly welcoming of comments, so I am unable to vent at them publically. Censored by design? ;)
Thank you
Thank you for writing this post, you have echoed my recent feelings on the subject completely.
Sad but true
You raise some good points. Rabid fanaticism (just one example: Its called GNU/Linux!!1!) is not a quality that should be applauded. With so many worthy causes, when is the FSF going to grow up?
I wholeheartedly agree. What
I wholeheartedly agree.
What happened to the competition in terms of technical superiority? It is apparent that the FSF is engaging itself to the very same FUD and smear campaigns it usually opposes. It is indeed disgusting that instead of promoting FSF's (or GNU's) own projects and ideology, the organization has taken a route to dismiss and defame the products of others.
The last donation I made was indeed the last. Ever.
I agree, they do seem to
I agree, they do seem to come across as fanatical nutters and do more harm than good.
You are, of course, correct
I've always been a bit leery of the FSFs priorities. For them its not about making software good, usable, and free. Instead they resemble one of those college protest groups that cares more about fighting a cause by recruiting members, seeking publicity, and attacking the enemy rather than actually accomplishing something.
Although its leadership would surely disagree, the Free Software Foundation should split off GNU code development into a separate nonprofit with, importantly, a separate fundraising arm. If I donate money to the FSF I want it to go towards furthering the GNU project: running servers, sponsoring code bounties, even hiring fulltime developers like Mozilla does. Instead, a good chunk of it goes to sending zealots to random conferences so they can demand everyone start adding a ridiculous acronym to the front of their product. Right now, folks like you can't make that choice with our money, so no money ends up in the FSF or GNU project's hand.
Post new comment