Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 30th Apr 2006 16:10 UTC, submitted by Mitarai
GNU, GPL, Open Source "When Richard Stallman learned that a compiler architect from ATI would be speaking at MIT, he immediately started organizing a protest against ATI's damaging free software policies. It all started, like most good protests, with a trip to Kinko's printing to make a sign. The request came from Richard Stallman for a 3'x2' sign, mounted and able to be carried with one hand easily. Several frustrating minutes with Inkscape, two trips to the store and one foam-core backing later, we had our sign, and it stated our message clearly in black letters on white background."
Thread beginning with comment 119694
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Boycott!!
by Disruptor on Sun 30th Apr 2006 19:51 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Boycott!!"
Member since:

Ok - this is really cracking me up:

"Rights goes both ways. As much as RMS got the right to protest, the architect from ATI got the right to transmit his message(s) without such disruptions. It's something that "freedom advocates" seem to forget."


`Transmit his message without disruptions'?

Say what? The guy was just sitting there silently ... what's `the disruption'? Just because he held a sign he was a disruption? And I really wonder:

1.) What they were thinking when they called the security. 2.) What that guy trying to get Rms out of the room thought he was doing.

No evaluation of the situation. No questions asked. No one even though `Hey, maybe, JUST MAYBE this guy has the _right_ to do this'. What kind of a dictatorship is this? What kind of attitude is this anyway? To those of you who would have their little ego hurt by an act like that of RMS (poor deers), I have an advice:

Grow up

Edited 2006-04-30 19:54

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[4]: Boycott!!
by Cloudy on Mon 1st May 2006 03:48 in reply to "RE[3]: Boycott!!"
Cloudy Member since:

RMS wasn't there silently sitting. He handed out flyers. What if he'd been an NVIDIA rep instead, handing out NVIDIA propaganda? Would you consider that disrupting?

In answer to your questions:

1) They weren't thinking, or they were frightened and made a bad judgement call.

2) The cop was thinking "I need to hear both sides, and I want to hear this guy's side in a neutral location."

No, I can't read the cop's mind, but the fact that the cops arranged for Stallman to stay pretty much demonstrates they, at least, were doing their jobs well.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: Boycott!!
by Disruptor on Mon 1st May 2006 06:53 in reply to "RE[4]: Boycott!!"
Disruptor Member since:

Even though I don't take back any of my opinions, I'ld like to apologize if my tone was a bit arrogant - maybe I should be a little more calm. I have been in situations like the one Rms was in and I let that get into me while posting - I'm sorry. I shouldn't have done that.

Now for the Nvidia rep: Yes they would have _every_right_ to hand out flyers. They wouldn't be causing any problems - It's their right to do something like that. The reason Nvidia/ATI/whatever doesn't do stuff like this is not because they don't have the right - it's because they would get ridiculed for fighting for _profit_ so desperately. If I was an ATI guy I would really almost _welcome_ them to ridicule their company like this. And no -if they were quiet like RMS- I wouldn't be disrupted.

As for the cop: ok - we weren't there and any side could claim it's own version of the story, but _if_ the cop asked Rms to pass outside immediately (as the folks in the article claim) it sounds to me like he was in `I-order-you-comply' mode and didn't care to evaluate the situation at all. And afterall seeing a quiet guy holding a sign during a lecture doesn't make him elligible for driving him out ...

Reply Parent Score: 2