The entire point of Free Software is about users being in control of their programs, so of course it is about the power dynamic. But of course even if it was ab

The entire point of Free Software is about users being in control of their programs, so of course it is about the power dynamic. But of course even if it was about him pissed - and he was pissed, which is something he did mention - it was because he was denied that control. There isn't really any other interpretation than that. Also the story you linked at is not RMS' story, but a different and more recent story which is also about a printer that sounds similar to RMS'. The RMS story is linked in the page you gave, though it is a transcript and kinda big. Here is the relevant bits: > And then I heard that somebody at Carnegie Mellon University had a copy of that software. So I was visiting there later, so I went to his office and I said, "Hi, I'm from MIT. Could I have a copy of the printer source code?" And he said "No, I promised not to give you a copy." [Laughter] I was stunned. I was so -- I was angry, and I had no idea how I could do justice to it. All I could think of was to turn around on my heel and walk out of his room. Maybe I slammed the door. [Laughter] And I thought about it later on, because I realized that I was seeing not just an isolated jerk, but a social phenomenon that was important and affected a lot of people. Emphasis on the last bit: "And I thought about it later on, because I realized that I was seeing not just an isolated jerk, but a social phenomenon that was important and affected a lot of people." And after all he made the Free Software Foundation, not Working Printers Foundation.