Boycotting FOSS

When we use proprietary software, we are under the power of the owner of the software. The owner's revenue depends on us, either directly through purchases and subscriptions, or indirectly through advertising. There is a relationship of power, with the owner having varying power over us.

When we feel that the owner is doing something unethical, we may choose to refuse to use their software. We do this to put financial pressure on them to change their practices. We may also do this to disassociate ourselves from them, due to not wanting to support their actions. We boycott this way in many other situations, it makes sense to extend it to software.

In contrast, Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) has no owner. Most free software is primarily maintained by one individual or group, power is shared with the users. We as users are given power over the software, which allow us to control the software to the same extent as anyone else. The power balance is shifted.

When the primary developer of a free program does something we find unethical, many are inclined to approach the matter similarly. However, with free software we are not bound by the program or the developers in the same way. We do not remove ourselves from someone's power when we boycott free software. We restrict our own access to and power over a potentially useful program.

If the software has features we don't like, we can remove them. If the software is hosted by one organization, we can deploy it ourselves. If these are impractical, or if the software is not actually useful, we can abandon it. But we do not need to give up on certain free programs based on reasons other than the software itself.

Of course, one may be boycotting programs made by a certain developer in an effort to hurt their feelings. This is a foolish reason to oppose software. Emotional manipulation is not going to solve any problem.

Unfortunately, I've seen all of this happen in FOSS communities. People refuse to use helpful software because of disagreements with the author. Worse yet, those who do use the software are sometimes shamed. This is terribly effective at weaving disunity within our own communities.

It is unnecessary to sow bitterness within ourselves and others for even a seemingly noble goal. The only result is smug superiority: "We aren't one of *them* who associate with one of *those* developers." Frivolously dividing our communities based on software usage is not worthwhile.

We cannot enrich society with free and open source software when we are busy attacking some of those making it.