1. These campaigns rarely stop anyone from using the technology that the FSF
bad mouths. It just makes the FSF look like a bunch of whiny tech evangelists
who represent a minority of the overall audience.
Instead of protesting on the web and bugging people outside of stores, why
don't they get together and show everyone an alternative in action? Use the
resources they get from the donations to code something that RMS or someone
from the FSF can go to the W3C or Google and show. Show that video can be
served with open codecs like Opus, Ogg, and WebM without Flash and DRM.
If the video needs to be protected, show how the content could be served in a
way where it can only be played on that domain or via a PGP key or something
similar tied to that person who purchased the content. I'm just throwing out
ideas here, but people listen when someone presents a concrete alternative
instead of just running around with picketing signs.
2. Google will support FLOSS if it benefits them and them alone. They are no
l onger the cool and hip tech upstart they were over a decade ago and are now
pretty much the same as Apple and Google.
They employ tens of thousands of employees and are an advertisting money.
They need your informtion when you search Google and the "social metrics"
when you use Google Plus. They want you to use Google Docs so they can put
you on a subscription plan. They tie the Android phones to their services so
you become dependent on them and they use the information from those services
to cater to advertisers.
3. Mozilla will fight it, but as we saw with the mobile Firefox web browser,
they gave in to using H264. Aren't the desktop versions going to use H264 in
the future if the codec is installed on the system? It was between taking a
stand or having people use their browser and potentially make them money.
They took the latter.
