In my skimming of the articles, I don't think there is really a substantive argument between the two points. O'Reilly is saying that we should be able to choose which license we release our code under, and Stallman and Kuhn are saying that we _should_ choose a license like the GPL.
Now, perhaps they believe that it shouldn't be a choice, but they certainly didn't say that. They mentioned the fact that our laws give us dictatorial status over our code, and said what we _should_ do in light of this, but did not argue with the law itself. The law itself is what O'Reilly is arguing--that there should be a law allowing us to choose our license for our work.
Stallman may disagree with that, but he certainly didn't say it.