Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 20:11:43 -0400
Subject: Re: SCO offers UnixWare licenses for Linux
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v552)
Cc: Michael Bernstein <michael@seven-angels.net>,
       Stephan von Krawczynski <skraw@ithnet.com>,
       Felipe Alfaro Solana <felipe_alfaro@linuxmail.org>, diegocg@teleline.es,
       gmicsko@szintezis.hu, Hurley Nick <hurley@cis.ohio-state.edu>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
To: Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com>
From: Michael Bernstein <michael@seven-angels.net>
In-Reply-To: <20030724234213.GA20064@work.bitmover.com>
Message-Id: <92A3044A-BE34-11D7-B1B8-000A95773C00@seven-angels.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 4767
Lines: 92


On Thursday, July 24, 2003, at 07:42  PM, Larry McVoy wrote:

> By your arguments, anything fundamental needs to be free.   Let me 
> know when
> you get a free house, car, food, health care, etc.
>
> Until then, we live in world with certain rules.  You don't have to 
> like them
> and you are welcome (in some countries to try and change them) but 
> until you
> do, you have to obey them or go to jail (or whatever the repercussion 
> is).

Well, certain countries give free health care, and eventually the 
United States will probably have to approach that due to the baby boom 
and the medicare problems currently.  However, a hospital in the United 
States cannot deny medical attention to someone in need, regardless if 
they can pay for it or not.

I think there is a difference between everyone getting everything free, 
and some people in need getting what they need to survive.  Government 
subsidized housing is nothing new for low income families.   The same 
goes for food.  You can then argue that in Africa, people starve.  
However, you would have to look at the relief aid organizations that 
are trying to change that.

The problem that arises is that not everyone has the MEANS to be able 
to afford the fundamentals that are required to live.  Many human 
beings feel it is necessary to help those in need since many of us 
(myself included) have much more then the average person.

Larry, I may only be 22, but I recommend you travel to some places like 
Egypt (and yes, I have been there) or parts of Eastern Europe, or even 
Mexico (and not Cancun or any beach front for tourists, I mean Mexico 
City).  You may disagree that humans should help out other humans in 
need, but you would at least realize how fortunate the majority of us 
are.  I would say that anyone who can afford to own a computer, be 
online, and all that jazz that goes along with being a geek, are quite 
fortunate indeed.  Sure, everyone has their problems, but you never 
grew up knitting rugs so that you could afford a menial meal each day.

I think Linux and free software in general have an idea of this, and 
that is why many people feel that software should be free.  Computers 
are becoming a fundamental need in life to survive in an increasingly 
competitive world.  I would argue that they are becoming more 
fundamental to everyday life then a car is.  Not only can it be 
considered as a method of economic survival, but also a tool for 
cultural understanding and communication.  Communication is probably 
the most fundamental human need  (after life sustaining needs), and 
computers allow that to happen at a level no one imagined.

This is all a philosophical argument with very real applications to the 
everyday life of most people.  To get back to the topic of IP, overall 
IP creates scenarios where corporations impede on the progress of human 
beings.  For an extreme scenario, what if someone could patent a new 
method for food production that could eliminate starvation worldwide.  
Would that be right to not allow it to be utilized for the betterment 
of society, or should one corporation, knowing its value, rule over the 
world and force its will upon humanity?

Another scenario (totally hypothetical, IBM is only an example with a 
huge patents collection!), much less extreme, which in all reality 
would hurt your livelihood as well.  What if a corporation like IBM 
pulled out a patent which gives them the right to all the work you have 
done.  You as the engineer who designed Bitkeeper are entitled to 
certain rights.  You developed an implementation of a system 
independently of anyone else's source control system.  However, one 
corporation that really didn't have a great interest in it pulled out a 
patent which basically destroys your current method of livelihood, 
regardless of the fact that you independently implemented it.  How 
would you feel?  What would this do?

If IBM had no product anywhere close to the functionality of Bitkeeper, 
the world would be forced to use inferior source control products 
because of the whim of one corporation.  Is that right?  IBM would be 
in fact stifling not only competition in the source control world, but 
progress as well.

Think about all of this, travel around, see the world.  It will make 
you a better person.  This isn't about a person's right to sell things, 
a person's right to own things, or the dissolution of the capitalistic 
state.  It's about fundamental humanity.

Michael Bernstein
michael@seven-angels.net

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/