🚀 go-pugleaf

For the record, the Apple boycott IS a real pain in the butt to people like
me who are doing FSF work and who unfortunately saddled ourselves with Macs
before the lawsuit.  I'd be happy if the LPF/FSF gave up the boycott, but
until then, I'm trying to rid myself of the two Macs my wife and I use, and
certainly not doing the development on Macs I had planned.

However, once I read that an Apple VP (of R&D or something like that)
publically stated that life would be better if copyright law was extended
to cover typeface design, I realized that the LPF/FSF had the right idea
in boycotting Apple.  This is a company that has, like Lotus, clearly chosen
using the courts as a means to restrict our freedom in writing software and
employs, at the highest levels, people who think in terms of legal restrictions
rather than the free and open software development environment that
encouraged the growth of the computer industry, including Apple, Lotus,
Microsoft, and other corporations (IBM excluded, perhaps).

It is easy to take potshots at people like rms for doing what they do.
But do remember that such people have shown a tendency (sometimes a very
strong one) to try and accomplish change using the most nondisruptive and most
peaceful means available, and also typically are far more aware of what is
really going on than the rest of us.

If they decide that a boycott of Apple is, at least for now, more important
than, say, a boycott of AT&T or other firms, I'm willing to accept that they
know more about what is actually going on in the firms involved and the
threats they pose.  And that the decision to boycott a firm comes only after
attempts have been made to reason with those in control of that firm or the
department making those decisions.

That doesn't mean I have to agree with every decision or accept those making
the decisions as omnipotent.

It just means I accept that before I say things like "The boycott of Apple is
stupid", I at least acknowledge a responsibility to learn as much or more
than rms&co know about the issues and the players involved, and to first try
out my "better solution" and prove it works (or might work).  Since I'd
rather spend my valuable time attacking the problem in at least one feasible
way, and the only feasible way I'm aware of is by contributing programming
efforts to the FSF and funds/volunteer time to the LPF, that's what I choose
to do.

So, yes, it is very inconvenient to work for an organization that supports
a boycott of a product that I basically like.  But rather than whine about it
(much :-), I just do the best I can.  Note that I don't personally support
boycotts anyway, for reasons of personal beliefs -- but that doesn't mean I
flagrantly violate the boycotts called for by the FSF/LPF, especially when I
am doing work as a contribution to FSF efforts.  (Before people flame me for
this statement, note that I've never been a fan of boycotts, even "politically
correct" ones like the boycott of S. Africa, various short-lived boycotts of
Shell Oil, and such.)

Whether I believe personally in boycotts, however, doesn't much affect my
views about whether society in general can or should use them and whether the
ones the LPF/FSF has in place are reasonable.  (I think they are, BTW.)
Similarly, my personal views on the death penalty don't affect my assessment
of whether it is (U.S.) Constitutional and/or a reasonable way to deal with
certain crimes, for example.
--

James Craig Burley, Software Craftsperson    burley@gnu.ai.mit.edu