To Whom it May Concern,

The Apple Challenge (under the auspices of Defective by Design) at
http://www.defectivebydesign.org/apple-challenge was just now brought to
my attention, and I find it quite troubling.  I have no sympathy and a
great deal of dislike for Apple, However this challenge was without excuse.

The Free Software Foundation has always stood for social responsibility
even over expediency, and this challenge provides neither.  The organiser of this
campaign has urged people to exhaust a limited resource that provides
a service to legitimate users.  This challenge can have no claim to
merely expressing opposition.  Even if one were to believe that going to
the Apple store and telling the low-level employees working there what
one thought would somehow be worthwhile (it wouldn't), saying "Why
not book more than one? Having lots of slots booked will get Apple's
attention and ensure that the Geniuses have done their homework."
clearly shows that this is an attack intended to disrupt a service to
gain attention.

This type of attack, exhausting all available resources to prevent use 
of a facility, is the same technique deplored as a DDoS attack throughout
the Internet and is commonly associated with vandals and extortionists.
The list of campaigns on the FSF website refers to DRM as an
'anti-social technology and practice'.  This "Apple Challenge" is an
equally anti-social practice and without any justification.  How is the Free
Software Foundation to maintain any kind of claim of a moral highground
or to champion social responsibility when employing illegitamte and and 
irresponsible techniques?

Almost as bad is that this campaign fails in accomplishing any goal.
Gaining Apple's attention is completely usless, unless one does it by
lowering their market share.  Even if one draws attention to oneself
by attacking part of their technical support service, what kind
of leverage does bring?  A threat that of a repeated attack?  I am
certain that Apple was already aware of your opposition through your
blogging, email, and previous activities.  This campaign did not bring
some new argument to mind, it didn't show that you could keep people
from buying their products.  It allows the enemies of Free Software to
paint you and the entire movement out as irresponsible hooligans who
must resort to petty vandalism.

The strongest supporters of Free Software are the community of the
technically literate on the Internet, but to that same group this
campaign is seen as an immoral attack, violating every principle of
citizenship on the Internet.  Through it, you have alienated members of
your core support and bolstered those you oppose.

There are many positive techniques one could employ.  Actively promote
that preserve the freedoms of their users, many people may not know they
exist or that they are comparable to unacceptable alternatives.  Make
well-known specific examples of users being prevented from doing what
they want or having their creativity squelched by the limitations on
Apple's devices.

I have always admired the FSF and its uncompromising stand on issues
of Freedom.  However, I believe that you have a duty to the Free Software
community to retract and apologise for the Apple Challenge.  There is no
shame in acknowledging when one is wrong, and repudiating this immoral
attack will show the world that the Free Software Foundation is more
dedicated to the causes of Freedom and social responsibility than to
those of preserving its image and hiding its mistakes.

Respectfully yours,


Adam C. Emerson