Stallman Selling Autographs 335
UltimaGuy writes "Sports stars, musicians, and other celebrities have been charging for autographs for years, but who would have thought Richard Stallman would be doing the same? Is this just for fun, or a clever, highly effective protest? Hackers, geeks and nerds gathered together at the 7th FISL - Internacional Free Software Forum, in Porto Alegre (Brazil) last week, were astounded when they got word that Richard Stallman, the founding father of the Free Software Foundation and creator of the GPL, was charging R$ 10 (about US$ 3) for an autograph and R$ 5 (less than US$ 2) to get his picture taken by free software enthusiasts at the event floor."
Yes, but... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Yes, but... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Yes, but... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Yes, but... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Yes, but... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Yes, but... (Score:2)
So I'm free to copy his signature onto, say, a loan application from a bank. After all, I have all the same freedoms and rights to do with it as the original author, right? I'm not less Free[tm] than RMS is when it comes to his signature, am I?
Re:Yes, but... (Score:2)
Double billing? (Score:4, Interesting)
Of curiosity, do you know this in some authoritative way or are you speculating? I didn't see this stated in the article.
You could, I suppose, test this by making a GPL'd program (to eliminate red herring objections based on your market paradigm) that uses a picture of Stallman (with a rectangle missing) and merges a gif you give it of yourself to that photo, and then give your program away as freeware (perhaps for media-cost on a disk you brought to one of his events). Like with any free software, you could get your grins from trying to drive down the market price of the original idea to a more "tolerable" level... zero, being the canonical tolerable level.
His primary point (made in the article), that fans have no inherent right to his time is right in principle. However, when you make yourself available for an event and especially if you're already paid for the event, it gets more questionable. [Credential: I've hosted a conference at which RMS spoke. He wanted a fee, which I had no objection to. Where feasible, speakers should get paid for time and travel. There are fortunately speakers who sometimes have the resources and interest to travel and/or speak where they can't be reimbursed, but it's not an obligation on speakers. Speaking takes prep time and time to do. And, in my limited experience, Stallman rightly insisted on being reimbursed for such things.] But if he had arrived and started charging people at my event for his services while he was on "our time", I'd have found that to be "double billing" (at best) and would have strongly considered kicking him out on the street on the spot.
Perhaps the conference event people approved of his action in advance. Or perhaps they didn't think to object on this basis. I suspect there's also a question at a conference on free software whether it's "his" conference. It may be his topic, but the ownership of time and conferences is something where I'd follow the money. Perhaps the conference had him as their guest speaker and didn't want to offend him even when he offended them. I don't know the full fact pattern, so am substituting questions for people to ask in order to speak on the issue. But Stallman speaks as if this were simply an issue of signer's rights, he's oversimplifying by not similarly qualifying his advice to others according to forum/venue, which certainly influences any discussion of rights.
It'd be quite another thing entirely if this fee were asked on his own time (say, when someone finds him in a restaurant or hotel or out on the street where he's not already scheduled). I might then argue that the fee was too low. Fans should not have their right to inject themselves upon unwilling celebrity in their private lives. But I don't see that that's what's going on here.
Re:Double billing? (Score:3, Insightful)
Except you aren't paying for ALL of their time - if you had paid for every hour of RMS's time on the floor then you would have some claim to control his actions during that time. But you didn't - you paid for his performance as a speaker and the costs to put him in earshot. Once the speaking is done, you got what you paid for.
Re:on one's own time? (Score:3, Interesting)
I think I said pretty clearly that I expected there might be conferences where this was expected, so this refutes nothing of what I said.
What makes Stallman's position questionable is, when you cut away all the guff, that his underlying claim is based on the notion that there are "good" and "bad" ways to earn money. He holds himself out as someone who wants to be judged in this li
Neither fun nor protest (Score:3)
Re:Neither fun nor protest (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Neither fun nor protest (Score:2)
What's interesting to me is that the article in Portuguese linked as the reference by "Han Solo, Jr." in the NewsForge article tells a slightly different version of the story
Hmm (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Neither fun nor protest (Score:5, Informative)
Poster sayeth:
You ought to read the GPL [gnu.org]. You can charge whatever price you want for any GPL'd software. That's one of the freedoms. You're also free to dual-license it if you're the creator - another freedom. It works for Trolltech (Qt), MySQL, etc.
GPL:
Re:Neither fun nor protest (Score:2)
Now, you can talk about support (blah, blah), and that may be a good enough business model for some companies to be profitable.. but personally, I went to school so I could have a career developing softw
Re:Neither fun nor protest (Score:2)
Ever noticed that some guys (RedHat or MandrakeSoft for example) built whole business models selling free stuff?
Re:Neither fun nor protest (Score:4, Insightful)
You went to school to have "a career developing software - not providing tech support". How nice. But if you want to sell your software, you're going to have to support it at the code level. Custom modifications, new features, etc. That's more than just "tech support."
Businesses pay for these things all the time. Ask any IBM customer.
Besides, that has nothing to do with the main thread - Stallman's free to charge whatever the market will bear for his autograph. You're free to charge whatever the market will bear for your autograph.
After all, why should they buy Stallman's autograph for $5 when they can get yours for $1?
My bet - Stallman will sell more autographs at $5 than you will at $1.
He'll also sell more autographs at $5 than you will for free.
The point? - Value is in the eye of the buyer, not the seller. If you can create value to the buyer, they will buy. If not, it doesn't matter that you spent 1,000 hours working on a piece of code - they won't take it even for free.
Re:Neither fun nor protest (Score:3, Insightful)
Cost to copy is the cost to produce the copies. The cost to produce the initial incarnation is a sunk cost that doesnt relate to the cost to produce the copies, except through artificial means.
"It costs potentially years of someone's life to produce an application, or piece of art or music."
In which case they should probably release early and release often, in order to keep a time advantage, or arrange their financing to pay for the actual time. The economy simply
Re:Very Fair (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Very Fair (Score:3)
Re:Neither fun nor protest (Score:2, Informative)
Stallman says:
The term "autograph tax" is a foolish exaggeration--I am not a government, so I cannot make anyone pay taxes. I'm told that such foolishness is common among the people making this criticism: that they generally seek opportunities to criticize the Free Software Foundation, whether valid or not.
This is a man who says that ATI is 'an enemy of your freedom.'
He is the king of foolish over-exaggerations.
Yet when someone applies the word 'tax'
I'd pay (Score:4, Funny)
Re:I'd pay (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I'd pay (Score:2)
Re:I'd pay (Score:2)
Re:I'd pay (Score:2)
I see no philisophical argment against selling signatures or photo-ops.
More RMS-themed merchandise ideas (Score:5, Funny)
OMG!!! RMS PONIES!!!
Re:More RMS-themed merchandise ideas (Score:4, Funny)
1. bunch of ponies
2. ??
3. HURD
I see it now.
Re:More RMS-themed merchandise ideas (Score:3, Funny)
Slow down girls! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Slow down girls! (Score:2)
So are you saying there is a way to make it past girls desperate to get close to RMS?
I think you might be right there...
How much for a pic? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:How much for a pic? (Score:2)
Oh the irony... (Score:4, Funny)
In all seriousness, I applaud Stallman's ironic sense of humor.
Re:Oh the irony... (Score:2)
Actually from the FA (Score:5, Informative)
Not quite Microsoft evil.
What a Great Idea. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:What a Great Idea. (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah... Ummm... Twitter, I'm uninviting you from my birthday party.
Re:What a Great Idea. (Score:2)
A nice thing to have, and definately a proper way to spend your money - the FSF is a benevolent effort, and will become even more important in the years to come, when our lives will depend even more on computers and software than they do right now.
Re: (Score:2)
Against what? (Score:4, Funny)
PS : Please don't reply "Whaddya got?"
Don't press this button syndrome (Score:3, Funny)
RMS is starting to "get it"? :) (Score:4, Insightful)
"People who ask me to sign or pose are asking for some of my time, which needs must come from my other volunteer work for the cause. On most occasions, the total time involved is not very large, so I do as they ask, taking steps to make the process efficient. But this does not mean my time is theirs to dispose of. I think it is entirely proper to ask people to make a small contribution to the cause in exchange."
---
When I write a piece of open source code, that takes a bit of my time too and is sometimes boring. By RMS's logic, I should charge each user some sort of nuissance fee so that my time is better spent on more "productive pursuits" or somesuch. Hrmmmmm...
I do like the fact that he is starting to grasp how scarcity is managed in a capitalist economy though.
Re:RMS is starting to "get it"? :) (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:RMS is starting to "get it"? :) (Score:5, Insightful)
Stallman was always about freedom in the political sense, not in the lack of economic compensation one.
Re:RMS is starting to "get it"? :) (Score:2)
Ah right, the old "charge $150,000 for the binary because the first person that buys it will just redistribute the source code completely legally under the terms of the GPL" approach.
Re:RMS is starting to "get it"? :) (Score:2)
Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you have the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for this service if you wish)
And from the GPL FAQ:
Does the GPL allow me to charge a fee for downloading the program from my site? Yes. You can charge any fee you wish for distributing a copy of the program. If you distribute binaries by download, you must provide "equivalent access" to
Re:RMS is starting to "get it"? :) (Score:2)
No one's forcing you to write GPL code. If you don't like its terms, don't agree to it and don't use it.
Re:RMS is starting to "get it"? :) (Score:2)
Hey, why not license your software such that the user has to pay a percentage of their revenue as a yearly license fee?
1. a. Don't write it unless you get a fair compensation for the labour involved.
1. b. Or unless you need to use the functionality to make your "life" better.
2. In the case of 1.b. - can you get done quicker starting with already written
Re:RMS is starting to "get it"? :) (Score:2)
RMS never said he had anything charging for services being wrong. What he doesn't like is the producer being able to hold him hostage. That's his opinion of how things should work, if you don't like it that way, then just don't release your work under the GPL.
Besides, earning money under the model of selling it to one person is perfectly possible. It's called contract work. Not all software is made to be sold on the shelf.
Re:RMS is starting to "get it"? :) (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, that's what he's always said. He just doesn't whan people to sell him something and make it legally impossible for him to alter it, so it works better for him, and to give the altered version to a friend.
So, if you want to put a smiley face on his autograph and xerox a copy for your brother, I'm sure he'd be okay with that.
Re:RMS is starting to "get it"? :) (Score:2)
Nope, not a good parallel. You can easily charge a fee to the one asking you to write that piece of code and get closer.
Also, nothing stops you from charging for every "handover" that you make. (Or am I missing something?) Now, why would they pay for his autograph and
I don't get it (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not like Stallman ever had anything against charging money, from what I heard, he sold Emacs tapes.
Re:I don't get it (Score:2)
"Highly effective"? (Score:3, Insightful)
Anyone care to explain how this can possible be construed as to be highly effective?
Let's see, RMS does something very subtle that nobody in the mainstream press will bother to report, or actually even *notice*, not to mention *understand*. I fail to see how this can in any way, shape or form be seen as an "highly effective" protest.
Of course this is Slashdot, but even then....I mean come on
Re:"Highly effective"? (Score:2)
As sucking up goes, "clever, highly effective protest" is pretty thin stuff.
You answered your question. (Score:2)
Surprise, Slashdot is mainstream press. Slashdot is the 64th most visited site on the net [netcraft.com]. That's right behind the New York Times, which is 56th and more read than the Drudge Report, 75th. Only BBC, CNN, Google, Yahoo and MSNBC are more read news sources. Neither CBS nor ABC news mak
Re:You answered your question. (Score:3, Insightful)
That was true five years ago. (Score:2)
That's less true everyday. The average US citizen spends no more than 15 minutes a day on news. That's an old figure from a journalism class I took, but it's not going to change much. As those 15 minutes are increasingly consumed online at work, other forms will dissapear. Here's a mainstream admission of that [usatoday.com], just in case you need someone official and legitimate to tell you the ob
Autographs are only the start (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Autographs are only the start (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Autographs are only the start (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Autographs are only the start (Score:2)
I'd pay money for a pin-up of RMS and ESR wrestling nude in a pool of lime Jell-O.
Re:Autographs are only the start (Score:3, Funny)
Hatchet piece - RTFA next time, stupid editors (Score:5, Insightful)
What do you people all have against RMS? Remember that you use his software every day.
Re:Hatchet piece - RTFA next time, stupid editors (Score:3, Informative)
please do
Re:Hatchet piece - RTFA next time, stupid editors (Score:2)
I don't see being a Linux fanboy as being a RMS fanboy. I use many tools on a daily basis, none of which are written by RMS [or being maintained by RMS for the last decade].
Tom
Re:Hatchet piece - RTFA next time, stupid editors (Score:2)
What does that prove? (Score:3, Informative)
Far, far more people use Bill Gates's software every day than RMS's, so what does that prove? (Yes, I know Bill didn't write most of MS's code but RMS didn't write much of the available "free" code either.)
Re:Hatchet piece - RTFA next time, stupid editors (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Hatchet piece - RTFA next time, stupid editors (Score:2)
only serve to deify stallman by giving him credit for far more than he deserves. open source, both as a practice and an ethic, predated stallman's rise to prominence. you're conveniently dismissive of both the BSD line and the other MIT lab who's output is fundamental to most unix-derived systems. in a
Re:Hatchet piece - RTFA next time, stupid editors (Score:2)
Re:Hatchet piece - RTFA next time, stupid editors (Score:2)
I acknowledge that he was a strong catylyst for the OSS movement.
I just don't think he's the reason millions of people are enjoying the OSS movement today. Many many many people work on OSS tools and when people blatantly say "OSS is because of RMS" they blatantly disregard their contributions.
If you think the best way to celebrate the OSS movement is to heroworship RMS then you obviously don't understand the scene.
Tom
Re:Hatchet piece - RTFA next time, stupid editors (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Hatchet piece - RTFA next time, stupid editors (Score:2)
No?
Oh ok.
What's your fucking point?
Re:Hatchet piece - RTFA next time, stupid editors (Score:2)
But hey, since you are a well known troll around here, I'll stop argueing with you now.
Re:Hatchet piece - RTFA next time, stupid editors (Score:2)
There is a difference between recognizing greatness and attributing credit.
Newton was a great person in that he differentiated himself with his discoveries. He did not, however, invent the internal combustion engine [that was Samuel Brown in 1823].
So by your logic Newton and da Vinci should get all the credit for the internal combustion engine. Samuel Brown was afterwall just a hack with no creativity or originality.
Again I challenge you. Create the RMS distro. Re
Re:Hatchet piece - RTFA next time, stupid editors (Score:2)
Re:Hatchet piece - RTFA next time, stupid editors (Score:2)
Recall the back in the day commercial vendors used watcom on x86, and the proprietary CC on others. Look at all the changes in the 2.x, 3.x and the new 4.x series. How many have his name on them? 2.x has been out for a VERY LONG TIME.
Saying that the OSS scene is just because of RMS is slap in the face to the thousands of people who donate thousands of hours of their lives to make scene better.
Tom
Re:Hatchet piece - RTFA next time, stupid editors (Score:2)
What's the big deal? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why is there an 'outcry' about Stallman and his organization making some money to support their efforts? It's how movements based on ideals, not keeping 'the bottom line' number big, sustain their organizations and themselves.
It's obvious (Score:5, Funny)
-- Dvorak
Re:It's obvious (Score:2)
He's closer $150 closer.
You need to sell (Score:2, Insightful)
Some other people produce products but give them out for free. They believe that is fair and money will naturally come from some place. Years pass, money don't come. So naturally, the people in question gotta rework their model so they can put food on the table. They will try to sell T-shirts, logos, tea cups and even branded underwear, but won't sell their products.
Years pass, some of those people are still living in their mom's basements (pardon the
Re:You need to sell (Score:2)
You gotta become a politicial you know, they like to shoot people's opinions down since "they don't have the moral right". Where do I buy that right. I refuse to eat, sleep and breath for 10 years? Or? What should I do.
To pay for media and distribution costs, only... (Score:2)
What is wrong in it ? (Score:5, Insightful)
One: It reduces the crowd as only those who are serious about getting the autograph will pay up. The others who get autographs just for kicks will stay away.
Two: It helps the cause a little bit. Especially if it is a person of the likes of Stallman who is associated with a not-for-profit movement.
Any way, charging $5 for an autograph or $2 for a photograph is much better than charging hundreds of dollars for a piece of software.
Sellout? (Score:5, Insightful)
donations work (Score:2)
If it's an official donation to the FSF, the foundation should also provide the option of official tax receipts to those who donate, unless there is a lower limit imposed; for example: no tax receipts fo
RTFA? (Score:2)
"By charging for autographs and for poses, I raised a few hundred dollars for the FSF and FSF Latin America..."
TFA is a little different then original text (Score:5, Informative)
Complete translation of the original article in the Business Journal Baguete
FISL: Stallman's autograph auctioned for R$ 22 (~US $10) 22/04/2006
An autograph from Free Software guru Richard Stallman was auctioned for R $23 (~US $11) at FISL 7.0 (International Free Software Forum) this Saturday, the 22nd. The initiative by gaucho Leonardo Vaz (Open BSB - RS) [Ed: Residents of the state of Rio Grande do Sul are called "gauchos".] caused a joyful uproar on this last day of the event when he went to personally deliver the money collected to Stallman, accompanied by about a hundred people.
Vaz bought Stallman's signature during the first edition of the Forum, six years ago. To charge contributions for the Free Software Foundation in trade for autographs or photo ops is only one of the eccentric habits of the American, who accepted the money gratefully and affirmed that it would be delivered to the recently founded Free Software Foundation of Latin America.
The auction concept summarizes the distracted atmosphere of this last day of FISL 7.0. The launch of GULA (Alcoholic Linux Users Group) is scheduled for 4:00 pm, which promises to shake up the final hours of the meeting.
[Obs. Apesar de ser canadense, moro em Brasil há seis anos agora.]
He was signing checks worth $3. (Score:2)
Yeah but... (Score:2)
Not the first time (Score:4, Interesting)
Demand? (Score:4, Insightful)
Move about five feet away from geekdom and you discover that he's no more important to the world than, say, past bridge champion Pierre Jais [worldbridge.org]. O.K., maybe that's too extreme... certainly he's no more important than Esperanto-creator Ludwig Zamenhof [wikipedia.org].
Every subculture has its heroes, and every subculture overestimates the value of its heroes to the general public.
Re:He has to make money somehow (Score:2)
Had you bothered to RTFA, you'd have known he was raising money for the FSF.
Re:we all know where the money is going (Score:2, Funny)
Hey Bill, is that you?! How's Windows Vista coming along? I thought it was going to be release this year?
Re:we all know where the money is going (Score:2)
Seriously, RMS is a very attractive man, if only he'd bathe one in a while, get his hair cut, not dress like such a slob, and sit up straight. Maybe he could also brush his teeth once in a while and not let his pants sag down so his but crack shows (there's this thing called a belt).
RMS could be a very sex
Re:Of course (Score:2, Funny)