Richard Stallman was the first developer to get paid for selling Free Software (the emacs editor) and in the original, first idea it was always intended that Free Software may and even should cost something. It was not intended as anti-capitalism software. It's free as in freedom, not as in free beer.
The idea that it is bad or not ethical for somebody working on Free Software to get paid is absurd.
There may be different names for the same thing, like Free Software, Open Source, Libre Software, and therefore acronyms like FLOSS, however, something called Communist Software, Anti-Capitalism Software, Money-is-Bad Software or similar would be a different thing and must not be confused with the former one.
I'm not saying that nobody should impose the restriction that people working on software are not allowed to take money for it. I'm saying that software with this restriction would be something different (and does not exist afaik) and as far as I am concerned I don't care about that kind of software or philosophy behind it. Just leave the devs that manage to get paid for working on FLOSS alone and do your own thing.
Well, the document itself might have been secret... but that's like labelling yesterday's weather forecast secret... ;-D