Free linux operating system

Unite, true-hearted Linux fans; proposal for a Linux standard has positive aspects, but could be bad news for future of the free operating system - Editorial

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Linux may not be perfect, but a new association that wants to set standards for the OS may do more harm than good with its tinkering.

The self-proclaimed Linux Standards Association (LSA), says it wants to set a "minimum standard for the Linux operating system based around already defined, extensively deployed and recognized standards." This means it basically wants to get rid of incompatibilities between software and hardware built for the Linux kernel.

It's an admirable goal, but the initiative loses its rosy glow when you take a close look at the LSA's charter on its Web site at www.linuxstandards.org.

The main reason for the success of Linux is that nobody owns it. Its developer, Linus Torvalds, has allowed the OS to be distributed free of charge to anyone who wants to use or improve it. This cooperative development via the Internet has pooled the resources of brilliant developers around the world. As a result, the Linux kernel has become a powerful OS with more than five million users despite its lack of corporate marketing.

The LSA says it wants to shape Linux into a more standardized, marketable product. It claims to be a non-profit organization representing independent hardware and software vendors. But if you read the group's charter, components of the standard will be the property of the LSA, not free under the GNU General Public Licence. Its proposal would destroy Linux's status as free software.

Besides setting standards, the LSA wants to create a test suite and build a trademarked version of the OS called Standard Linux so developers can test applications. It also wants to produce and market "trademarks that indicate conformance to the developed standard." The trademarks will only be made available by licence to those who conform with the standards and pay a fee to the LSA.

Then there are the membership issues. The LSA Web site says observer members will pay no fees. They will be able to discuss the standards in on-line forums and have a place on the organization's mailing lists, but this sounds like a glorified fan club with little real influence on the LSA's decisions.

Regular members will be able to take part in discussions, submit proposals and vote on issues, but will have to pay an annual fee for the privilege.

The LSA hasn't set its fees yet, but if they are high it could rule out membership by independent developers who have played such a key role in the evolution of Linux. And if there's truth to reports from the U.S. that large players such as Intel, IBM and Oracle are being courted as regular members, how will small developers have a voice at a table dominated by the industry's giants?

Even more worrisome, the LSA's charter gives veto power to two private companies that it refers to as founding members -- Innovative Logic Corp. of Laurel, MD, and NC Laboratories Inc. of Stockton, CA. The LSA has also reserved the right not to renew memberships, which sounds like an effective way to silence dissenting voices.

Contrary to the LSA's claims that Linux needs to be under its control in order to be a business success, companies such as Caldera and Red Hat are already offering popular commercial versions.

Linux would indeed benefit from some standardization, but at the same time, control shouldn't be snatched from independent developers and given to private business. The LSA's proposal, as it stands, would kill the somewhat chaotic and revolutionary spirit of Linux that has been one of its strengths.