IBM's Goal Is Not (and Never Was) Computer Users' Freedom
This article, unlike the previous one, is not about Wayland. It is also not about GNU/Linux.
More than 1.5 decades ago - set aside the SCO case - I found IBM to be an "ally of convenience" because of OpenDocument Format (ODF), which IBM hoped would help it sell proprietary software for collaboration and productivity suites.
Lotus Symphony didn't gain adoption; it failed. Lotus Software, once an American software company based in Massachusetts, "was sold [by IBM] to India's HCL Technologies in 2018" (according to Wikipedia).
IBM has since then failed at almost everything it tried; the company still exists owing to vendor lock-in and very old government contracts. To still exist the company is moreover cheapening the workforce by sending the work to "cheaper" countries, notably India (even east Europe is nowadays considered "too expensive" for IBM).
If once traces back IBM to its roots (100+ years ago) one finds racism aplenty. The only excuse/s IBM might give is, eugenics and racial segregation were popular at the time and "times change".
In terms of users' freedom, IBM never spoke about or cared about those things. In the 1990s IBM rushed to adopt "Linux" because Microsoft had gained considerable ground and IBM found itself losing its complacent dominance. IBM was dying and Lou Gerstner cut it to bits in the same way Microsoft does in recent years.
Those of us who value GNU/Linux for reasons such as "freedom" rather than "it's stable" or "I like the Tux logo" would likely develop scepticism towards IBM's attitude, which includes censorship of people who disagree, in the name of "herding cats" in some "unruly" community (because bombing people is OK, forking a Free project like X isn't).
IBM will never be a flag bearer for Software Freedom. If at IBM you're their employee "100% of the time", then every Red Hat staff is also handcuffed outside working hours.
The community builds and maintains systems it can manage and control rather than inherit from the orifices of IBM (and GAFAM). "EU OS" gets it wrong because to operate independently one needs full control, not IBM shackles.
While it's true that many Red Hat employees develop and maintain critical components of many operating systems (not just Fedora), a cautious developer would not put too many eggs in the IBM basket.
To IBM, Mohammed bin Salman is far better an ally than the FSF, which apparently is more immoral than Mohammed bin Salman, the fervent supporter of women's rights and equality for all. █