From the garbage pile: "Could the FSF not find any law firm that, in addition to talking about or for Free software, does not use .NET, OOXML, and almost everything Microsoft? Even in 2025?"
One, no you cannot. Lawyers live in the world of Microsoft Office. Two, one does not choose a law firm based off the tools they use.
Yeah, unless this is someone at the FSF, you don't really get to tell your attorney what tools they use. Sure, FSF could try and find someone who aligns with their beliefs, but often that's not feasible.
What a garbage "article."
From the garbage pile: "Could the FSF not find any law firm that, in addition to talking about or for Free software, does not use .NET, OOXML, and almost everything Microsoft? Even in 2025?"
One, no you cannot. Lawyers live in the world of Microsoft Office. Two, one does not choose a law firm based off the tools they use.
Par for the course with Techrights, unfortunately.
Many archiac court systems still demand filings in MS-Word.
The export features in Libreword is pretty good.
https://help.libreoffice.org/25.2/en-US/search?P=Docx&DEFAUL...
FSF has never been opposed to using privative software when there's no alternative.
Presumably, compatibility concerns forced them to.
They must have used MS Office because Libreoffice doesn't save in DOCX.
Oh wait https://www.libreoffice.org/discover/libreoffice/
A DOCX file alone isn't enough evidence that MS Office was used.
The federal system, and every state ecf system I’ve seen, requires PDF.
I’ve tried Star / Open / Libre Office every year since 9x. They still aren’t as robust as Word 6 for Windows 3.1 released 35 years ago.
Literally nobody cares
Lawyers will use whatever tool they know best for their job. And protip, LibreOffice is rarely that
Yeah, unless this is someone at the FSF, you don't really get to tell your attorney what tools they use. Sure, FSF could try and find someone who aligns with their beliefs, but often that's not feasible.
Supporters of the FSF maybe?