![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
mjg59The Free Software Foundation Europe and the Software Freedom Conservancy recently released a statement that they would no longer work with Eben Moglen, chairman of the Software Freedom Law Center. Eben was the general counsel for the Free Software Foundation for over 20 years, and was centrally involved in the development of version 3 of the GNU General Public License. He's devoted a great deal of his life to furthering free software.
But, as described in the joint statement, he's also acted abusively towards other members of the free software community. He's acted poorly towards his own staff. In a professional context, he's used graphically violent rhetoric to describe people he dislikes. He's screamed abuse at people attempting to do their job.
And, sadly, none of this comes as a surprise to me. As I wrote in 2017, after it became clear that Eben's opinions diverged sufficiently from the FSF's that he could no longer act as general counsel, he responded by threatening an FSF board member at an FSF-run event (various members of the board were willing to tolerate this, which is what led to me quitting the board). There's over a decade's evidence of Eben engaging in abusive behaviour towards members of the free software community, be they staff, colleagues, or just volunteers trying to make the world a better place.
When we build communities that tolerate abuse, we exclude anyone unwilling to tolerate being abused[1]. Nobody in the free software community should be expected to deal with being screamed at or threatened. Nobody should be afraid that they're about to have their sexuality outed by a former boss.
But of course there are some that will defend Eben based on his past contributions. There were people who were willing to defend Hans Reiser on that basis. We need to be clear that what these people are defending is not free software - it's the right for abusers to abuse. And in the long term, that's bad for free software.
[1] "Why don't people just get better at tolerating abuse?" is a terrible response to this. Why don't abusers stop abusing? There's fewer of them, and it should be easier.
But, as described in the joint statement, he's also acted abusively towards other members of the free software community. He's acted poorly towards his own staff. In a professional context, he's used graphically violent rhetoric to describe people he dislikes. He's screamed abuse at people attempting to do their job.
And, sadly, none of this comes as a surprise to me. As I wrote in 2017, after it became clear that Eben's opinions diverged sufficiently from the FSF's that he could no longer act as general counsel, he responded by threatening an FSF board member at an FSF-run event (various members of the board were willing to tolerate this, which is what led to me quitting the board). There's over a decade's evidence of Eben engaging in abusive behaviour towards members of the free software community, be they staff, colleagues, or just volunteers trying to make the world a better place.
When we build communities that tolerate abuse, we exclude anyone unwilling to tolerate being abused[1]. Nobody in the free software community should be expected to deal with being screamed at or threatened. Nobody should be afraid that they're about to have their sexuality outed by a former boss.
But of course there are some that will defend Eben based on his past contributions. There were people who were willing to defend Hans Reiser on that basis. We need to be clear that what these people are defending is not free software - it's the right for abusers to abuse. And in the long term, that's bad for free software.
[1] "Why don't people just get better at tolerating abuse?" is a terrible response to this. Why don't abusers stop abusing? There's fewer of them, and it should be easier.
no subject
Date: 2023-10-12 05:48 pm (UTC)Amen
Date: 2023-10-12 08:50 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2023-10-13 02:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2023-10-13 06:39 am (UTC)It's also bad for free software to take money from Microsoft. Also in the short run.
no subject
Date: 2023-10-13 06:43 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2023-10-13 06:50 am (UTC)Judge by the past?
Date: 2023-10-19 06:27 pm (UTC)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust
And so on...
Re: Judge by the past?
Date: 2023-10-19 08:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2023-10-13 09:19 am (UTC)When I clicked on the links on the descriptions of his misbehaviour, I was a bit shocked that they only point to individual claims by other people. Although that still might be a good clue if the claims are uttered independently (which outsiders cannot assess), that's a bit weak for describing them as facts in a professional context (vs. "he allegedly acted poorly towards his own staff").
To me, this blog post isn't very convincing in its intended message. It makes me rather worry whether the FSF is a place where you'd have to worry that a collective deciding to get you out of your position would lead to very bad allegations against you being treated as facts.
Because from what the blog post is presenting, the situation could be both. As an outsider, this blog post does not allow me to assess which one it is, nor to take sides with anyone here.
no subject
Date: 2023-10-13 11:18 am (UTC)strongly agree
no subject
Date: 2023-10-13 02:56 pm (UTC)If you had actually read that, you would see a great deal of abusive behavior by Eben Moglen that's official court record, including a judge agreeing that Eben Moglen had been abusive to Bradley Kuhn. You are free to look at Moglen's own actions, as recorded in court documents, and decide if he has been abusive.
The rest of us are of course free to decide you're just an abuse apologist asking questions in bad faith.
He is a lawyer...
Date: 2023-10-15 05:46 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2023-11-02 12:26 pm (UTC)> The rest of us are of course free to decide you're just an abuse apologist asking questions in bad faith.
I could as well argue that you're defending a bad blog post in bad faith. Because if this blog post stays as unconvincing as it is (this is what I criticised in my first comment), it will do a much "better" job at defending abuse than any abuse apologist could do.
no subject
Date: 2023-10-20 12:32 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2023-10-25 02:29 pm (UTC)