I think basically the author is right.  We need to look at the idea Richard Stallman was proposing, instead of
getting after him for other things that he did.  I'm not excusing him or claiming that he is good in all
aspects, but let's focus on his idea.  If we want to talk about what he has done, that can be a separate conversation.

Now, as much as I enjoy software that is permissively licensed, I do have to admit after reading that article that
it's all a bit "too free".  It can be too freely made into proprietary software.

And yes, a lot of times people simply think that "Free Software" means you can see the source code, and that's
mostly where it stops.  These are (just like me) non-programmers, but it's not a programming question; rather,
it's a philosophical one.  Sure, you will let anyone do near dang anything you want with your software.  But,
are you going to allow EVERYTHING, without exception, including your software being made proprietary, or will
you put the one restriction on it that ensures that everyone else gets to use it freely? 

Basically, this all is just me saying, "Yea, I see now how a lot of "open source" software is really just
being used to further proprietary interests (I don't have a good way of phrasing what I want to say here)",
whereas if it was all under Copyleft, even if it was being used by a business, you would still be guaranteed
real freedom.



Now I know that some of you will want to talk about all that other stuff Richard Stallman has said and done.  Some of
you nosy people probably want to know what I think of all that.  Well, what little I have seen on his website, I
think it's quite safe to say that Free Software is probably the ONLY thing I would agree with him on.  Regarding
what little I know of his politics otherwise, I would disagree on probably everything else.  Do I know everything he
believes in?  No, and that is why I say "probably".

Similarly, even though I think the article that this is a response to is rather good, even there I don't fully agree
with everything, or at least some of the sentiments.  Though largely the article stays on point, and in this case
I agree with (at least 90% of) the point.