I don't understand this, and maybe that's because I don't own a Linux system. If this is what he's saying, does he want everyone to just use Linux to play free or pirated games rather than buy games that have any form of DRM?
Right, so the moral of it is: "Anything that costs money doesn't support freedom. Me telling you not to use it supports freedom."
I really hate a lot of the Linux community for pretty much this reason. They act like if anybody besides Red Hat does commercial software, it's gonna be like Windows and every distro will be locked down or something.
For a bunch of pretty smart guys, most of them are retarded.
I sort of get where he's coming from
but the idea that programs ('information') should be free is stupid. It boils down to asking programmers/GUI artists/etc to work for free
Red Hat produces enterprise Linux: it costs money to use, you have to pay. Still Red Hat is considered to produce free software: because once purchased it can be used without limitation.
Even Stallman's own Free Software Foundation supports the idea of selling free software:
Wikipedia posted:
The Free Software Foundation encourages selling free software. As the Foundation has written, "Distributing free software is an opportunity to raise funds for development. Don't waste it!".[28] For example the GNU GPL which is the Free Software Foundation's license states that "[the user] may charge any price or no price for each copy that you convey, and you may offer support or warranty protection for a fee."[29]
The definition of free software is that it is free as in "freedom" not free as in "free beer". The issue, then, with Steam is that it uses DRM, as unobtrusive as the vast majority of us find it to be.