An anonymous reader writes: The free software foundation has claimed that free software is not about cost, but Richard Stallman has been quoted several places as saying it is in fact about cost. The GPL v2 license makes it a legal contract to offer the software "FREE OF CHARGE" and not free as in speech.
The FSF has had over 1 million dollars in their bank account back in 2001 (not considering inflation) and paid Eben Mogen $280,000 (six figure income) in 2007. Stallman has been quoted as saying "we have been so successful because we have shown we can develop software without any money".
This indeed sounds like a logical contradiction, similar to double speak (free of charge means it is not free of charge, and without money means with money). GNG is Not GNU exposes the Richard Stallman movement as a cult similar to a religion. GNG is not GNU is a recursive joke explained on the GNG website. Is the FSF a modern cult?