Yeah, I understood the argument but unless RMS claimed never to have benefited directly or indirectly from his activities, I'm not sure why it's worth pointing out. In other words it's only a contradiction if he claimed premise 1 is true. Otherwise it's just a misunderstanding of FOSS.

In any case that's definitely not the main point of the article - just an example of sloppy reasoning that struck me on reading it, which doesn't necessarily invalidate the whole.