Slashdot Mirror
The RMS Tour Rider
larry bagina writes "It's no secret that rock stars have riders — provisions on their contractual appearances that require a bowl of brown-free M&Ms or specify the exact brand of bottled water, cocaine purity, etc. Well, Richard Stallman has his own quirky list of provisions." Some of the best stuff is at the end, including: "I do not eat breakfast. Please do not ask me any questions about what I will do [for] breakfast. Please just do not bring it up," and "One situation where I do not need help, let alone supervision, is in
crossing streets. I grew up in the middle of the world's biggest
city, full of cars, and I have crossed streets without assistance even
in the chaotic traffic of Bangalore and Delhi. Please just leave me
alone when I cross streets."
To be fair, the "no brown M&Ms" requirement for Van Halen had a practical purpose. They were finding that a lot of their technical requirements- power supply, lights, venue personnel- were being ignored and problems cropped up when they came to a gig. Sooooo... Near the end of the contract rider- after the technical requirements- they put the 'bowl of M&Ms with no browns' item in as a check. If they found a bowl of M&Ms *with* browns in the dressing room, they directed their guys to go over anything with a fine toothed comb to make sure technical requirements were met because, obviously, the venue setup people did not read the entire rider. And, yes, they found technical problems when they had the "M&Ms with browns" in the dressing room.
Just for good measure:
http://www.snopes.com/music/artists/vanhalen.asp
Brown Out
Claim: Van Halen's standard performance contract contained a provision calling for them to be provided with a bowl of M&Ms, but with all the brown candies removed.
Status: True.
Example: [Harrington, 1981]
Van Halen tends to make the news portion of radio more often than it gets airplay. There was the M&M riot in New Mexico where the band did thousands of dollars of damage to a hall when they were served brown M&Ms — their contract said the brown ones had to be removed.
Origins: Rock concerts have come a long ways since the days when the Beatles performed in boxing rings and hockey rinks, and made no greater demand of Van Halen promoters than they be provided with clean towels and a few bottles of soft drinks. As the audiences grew larger, promoters stood to make more and more money from staging concerts, which meant that not only could rock stars command higher prices for their performances, but they were able to demand other perks as well, such as luxurious accommodations, lavish backstage buffets, and chauffeured transportation. It was inevitable that some high-demand acts, all their financial and pampering whims satisfied, would exercise their power and start making frivolous demands of promoters, simply because they could.
By far the most notorious of these whimsical requests is the legend that Van Halen's standard concert contract called for them to be provided with a bowl of M&Ms backstage, but with provision that all the brown candies must be removed. The presence of even a single brown M&M in that bowl, rumor had it, was sufficient legal cause for Van Halen to peremptorily cancel a scheduled appearance without advance notice (and usually an excuse for them to go on a destructive rampage as well).
The legendary "no brown M&Ms" contract clause was indeed real, but the purported motivation for it was not. The M&Ms provision was included in Van Halen's contracts not as an act of caprice, but because it served a practical purpose: to provide an easy way of determining whether the technical specifications of the contract had been thoroughly read (and complied with). As Van Halen lead singer David Lee Roth explained in his autobiography:
Van Halen was the first band to take huge productions into tertiary, third-level markets. We'd pull up with
nine eighteen-wheeler trucks, full of gear, where the standard was three trucks, max. And there were many, many technical errors — whether it was the girders couldn't support the weight, or the flooring would sink in, or the doors weren't big enough to move the gear through.
The contract rider read like a version of the Chinese Yellow Pages because there was so much equipment, and so many human beings to make it function. So just as a little test, in the technical aspect of the rider, it would say "Article 148: There will be fifteen amperage voltage sockets at twenty-foot spaces, evenly, providing nineteen amperes . . ." This kind of thing. And article number 126, in the middle of nowhere, was: "There will be no brown M&M's in the backstage area, upon pain of forfeiture of the show, with full compensation."
So, when I would walk backstage, if I saw a brown M&M in that bowl . . . well, line-check the entire production. Guaranteed you're going to arrive at a technical error. They didn't read the contract. Guaranteed you'd run into a problem. Sometimes it would threaten to just destroy the whole show. Something like, literally, life-threatening.
Nonetheless, the media ran exaggerated and inaccurate accounts of Van Halen's using violations of the "no brown M&Ms" clause as justification for engaging in childish, destructive behavior (such as the newspaper article quoted at the top of this page). David Lee Roth's version of such events was decidedly different:
The folks in Pueblo, Colora
There are some people that if they don't know, you can't tell 'em.
He also refuses to have a cell phone because "they are tracking and surveillance devices" and "most of them are computers with nonfree software installed". Except if he needs to make a call, he has no problem borrowing someone else's.
Obvious exits are NORTH, SOUTH, and DENNIS.
Here - the entire quote makes it quite clear:
It is abundantly clear that he believes it is better not to respect copyright, and that it pirating copyright software is okay because it is attacking someone "who deserves it."
So, to be perfectly consistent, since the GPL depends on copyright, I should be perfectly okay to violate the GPL because "that evil person who puts restrictions on what I can do with their code deserves it" - which, btw, is now a valid defense to any company that violates any GPL code held by the FSF, since they're entitled to depend on the copyright holders' public statements.
As for the "personal attacks", the wackjob known as Stallman has it coming, since he has engaged, via such statements, in personal attacks on every programmer who has ever written proprietary code for a living. Anything less is not being consistent.
The OP was actually being nice compared to the reality that is RMS. "Narcissistic man-child with basic lapses of hygiene that even a 6-year-old "gets" (like picking his boogers or toe jam and eating it in public is a "no-no") who lost his ability to code more than a decade ago, and as a result is doing everything he can to demean programmers, even those who contribute to F/LOSS, if they don't slavishly accept his now-failed idea that "the GPL is the only acceptable license" is more like it.
The GPL has failed. It has created software that is LESS, not more, free. Most of the really useful stuff (apache, firefox, php, mysql, android, chrome, openoffice, qt) either uses a different license, or a license exception that doesn't require copyleft redistribution of the source code of modifications.
The two successful consumer OSes? Windows and OSX (derived from FreeBSD). Even WalMart, who can sell pretty much ANYTHING, couldn't sell a discount $200 Linux PC - the returns ate any profit. But they can sure move a wad of 64gig iPad2s at $829 and even gaming laptops running Windows at $1,500.00.
Heck, the GPL doesn't even conform to the requirements of free software listed on the FSF home page.
Smart people learn from their mistakes. REALLY smart people learn from other people's mistakes. RMS? He's the #1 example of "open source for closed minds."
The GPL removes the financial incentives, and that's why we've never had a year of the linux desktop, and never will.