I would like this story, but it comes across as typically RMS preachy - people should have inherent moral rights to what they own, but people also have a moral right to sell their work instead of giving it away if they want. That is a different issue to DRM.
Nothing RMS said or says is against selling digital products. IIRC, he had himself sold copies of GNU Emacs - obviously, properly obeying GPL license they were under, i.e. providing buyers with four essential freedoms that Free Software is all about.
It's just that works are usually not sold, but only licensed, because giving users rights to do whatever they want with their copies conflicts with current idea that people have exclusive rights to their works (actually, not usually their, but the ones they brought from original creator).
Wonder what difference it would cause if someone to regulate that market and force sellers to use proper wording in their offers, so you won't see calls to "buy a book" (unless you really buy it, huh), but only "license a book" or "buy/get a license for a book." Oh, right, nothing, it's just "buy٭" or "$0.99٭" buttons everywhere.
