The article errs in calling me an "open source firebrand". I lead the free software movement, which is a campaign for software users' freedom. This is a matter of justice, and we fight for it; I am proud to be a firebrand for free software and freedom.
The idea of an "open source firebrand" is an oxymoron, because the whole purpose of "open source" is to reject and bury the issue of freedom. The open-source non-movement denies that there is anything here to fight for.
Please don't misrepresent my views by suggesting I am a supporter of that.
See http://gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html
for more explanation of the difference between free software and open source. See also http://thebaffler.com/past/the_meme_hustler for Evgeny Morozov's article on the same point.