License Issues...

[John P. Mitchell]

All (Maybe Alan Cox?),
  
    Please let me preface this email with a short note about tenor. I am attempting in this email to respect all 
individuals while at the same time address what I see as a serious issue in the "Free" software community. I am 
writing the email with the utmost respect and wish that it would not come across as negative nor is meant to flame 
anyone. If it comes across as negative to someone I apologize ahead of time.
  
    I am a long time Linux user starting in 1995 on Slackware. Back then I had no concern about software license and 
what not. Even today the concept of "free" and "not free" is about how much cash I took out of my pocket and gave to 
someone for something that is going to be "mine". So when I learned about the depths of "license" and what that really 
means and what "Free" means to the Linux community I was still confused to some extent. I would not bring this up in 
this list if I where not trying to advocate Red Hat Linux (now "Fedora Core", which by the way my customers will not 
understand or like) in my local community correctly and with proper respect to individuals rights to code and use of 
such code. So, to the core of what I am talking (blathering really) about. Everyday users/small companies do not have 
the resources (time, energy, money to hire lawyers, will, intelligence (see above "pay for something it is mine" 
concept)) to spend on understanding license and how they affect one another and what not. They only know this "Dang 
this Linux thing sucks, it cant play my cool new Matrix DVD on my computer. I am going back to Windows.". How do we 
overcome this? Users want to play DVDs and listen to MP3s. Users want to do everything they are accustomed to doing on 
Windows on Linux, and personally so do I which is why my main machine is a Mac OS X machine. I want to pitch "Fedora 
Core" to my customers and sell them service, not software. I want "Free" software to succeed so bad it hurts some 
days. How will we get to the point when "Free" and "Closed" software can co-exist in the same machine legally and 
technically? They should be able to without huge in depth discussions that average users would get lost in.
  
    Also, I think that half of all this trouble is due to the fact that lawyers out there are changing what the truth 
is and redefinging concepts with laws to fit the individual's mindset who hired them. This leads to silly assertions 
like: "You wrote a kernel module to work with a Linux kernel, thus that kernel module is a derivitive work.". Hog 
wash. Just the same that my custom computer case that works with ATX only motherboards is not a derivitive work of ATX 
x86 motherboards. It is a wholly original work that I have built that happens to work with ATX motherboards, but would 
also work just fine as a AT x86 motherboard with some work. If I had taken an x86 motherboard and integrated it into 
my ATX case so that it was no longer seperable and could not be used in any other way, then it would be a derivitive 
work since I took someone else's work and made it an integral part of my work. As it is the kernel module can be 
pulled out and it can be executed by itself in another piece of code with some work, and the kernel can operate 
without the custom kernel module with some work. Help me here if I am totally out of whack, but derivitive work means 
to take parts of someone else's work and include them in your own so they are inseperable, and please do not say to 
talk to some lawyer. I do not have the money to pay a lawyer to counsel me on every aspect of my life, and neither 
should I need one. What happened to the days of reason? It seems as if the noble concept of "Free" is destroyed if I 
am not be able to use my "Free" something with my not "Free" something.

    Also, if someone with the knowledge/wisdow to email/speak with me on this topic at length outside of this forum to 
help me in my endeavor to get the "Free" concept, GPL, and how it interacts with the various other license concepts 
down cold, I would appreciate it. I want to use Linux, GPL software, and "Free" software as components to build my 
service business, but I want to repsect the authors. I also want to provide a rich and compelling environment for 
users that will pay service fees to support it without breaking "law" or exposing myself to the threat of legal 
action.
  
    As an aside. I am very pleased that so many people in the "Free" software community are willing to share the 
fruits of their labor with everyone else. My deepest thanks goes out to all of you for your hard work. This especially 
includes all those folks out there who maintain code bases. I do not envy you and your difficult task, but I am oh so 
thankful for it.
  
Regards,
    John P. Mitchell <john at cepros.com>
    Email Sticker: My Boss is a Jewish carpenter
    http://www.GoboLinux.org | User #00010110