>if you are a large company wanting the FSF to be less relevant, you should probably encourage them to let RMS alienate more people. Perhaps they want to steer

>if you are a large company wanting the FSF to be less relevant, you should probably encourage them to let RMS alienate more people. Perhaps they want to steer the direction of the free software movement to be more corporate friendly, i.e. get people to write software for free but none of that pesky copyleft stuff. More directly, there is an optional "or any later version" in the GPL, so if they can get the FSF to make the next version of the GPL more corporate friendly that also includes a lot of existing software (although I don't know how popular this clause is in practice).