All of this is GNU/Zen.

Yet, there are still companies that do not comprehend. There are companies who misunderstand the reason that available source works. There are companies that are, perhaps, simply using the community for whatever can be gained from them. Sucking code from the world, without replenishing the resources. It may be, that they simply do not yet understand, or perhaps they, like coal mining companies in the early 20th century, do not care.

Look, for instance, at the Wine project. A well known and much appreciated /Available Source/ project. Wine is an attempt to rewrite the Windows API for the UNIX platform. If we look at the tenants of GNU/Zen it has done an amazing job. In fact, it has followed GNU/Zen so well, that other groups have been able to take their code and improve upon it. This is the perfect Zen state of all Available Source.

Alas, children of GNU/Zen, those who improved on the code have not understood the truth and beauty of the /code uncompiled/. The simple state of GNU/Zen. There is an ambitious project in the works today that is releasing closed-source improvements to the Wine system. Is it legal? Of course. Does it follow GNU/Zen? Does it show any understanding of the community? Does it show any appreciation for the source that they're basing their entire business on? Sadly, the answer to all of these questions is, no.

I am, of course, referring to the LindowsOS. That hybrid mix of Linux, Wine and proprietary software. Lindows.com has made several statements about the changes they've made to Wine. If we believe their website, their additions to Wine are leaps forward in the project development. Wine, traditionally has been able to handle 70 to 80% of Windows applications, not including anything that utilizes special .dll's. The LindowsOS website appears to hint at almost full Windows compatibility and improvements in stability. Hurray for them.

But think about this for a moment, if you will. Wine source code has dripped from the fingers of a number of developers. Many of them using different distributions of Linux to build on. The architecture, design, inspiration has been theirs. Lindows has taken it to the next level, helped to complete their dream, but essentially denying the creators access. Obviously, denying access to the code, but also denying access to the improvements. If they choose not to run 'Lindows', perhaps in favor of another distro, they have no way of using the improvements made to their creation. Those of have helped debug and test Wine are in the same situation.

A greater crime, though, is the fact that the Wine developers will now have to continue on, re-developing the solution that Lindows has already built. This is a waste of time and resources that could be better spent solving new problems.

Still greater, is the loss to future developers. An entire section of creative solutions, denied to those who are only beginning to develop, learning to code, discovering how computers work.

So for a mere $99.00 you can buy a proprietary improvement on a product that has been created by the community. What have they given back? What have they done to ensure the continuation of the community? As of yet, nothing. /Available Source/ is a renewable resource, but if companies take, without replenishing, are they any better than the companies that practice deforestation without replanting?

I may not have written this, except for a final straw, a last show of complete abuse of the community. Lindows is currently being sued by Microsoft for trademark infringement, a pathetic case, obviously an attempt by Microsoft to simply squash a potential competitor.

Lindows has established themselves as a For Profit, proprietary software firm, just like Adobe or even Microsoft. Their legal issues are theirs to solve, they are for profit and hence they can afford lawyers. That's part of running a business. However, Michael Robertson, CEO of Lindows, has come to the community for help. Asking the community to retrieve instances of the usage of the word 'Windows'. The idea is that, windows is too common a word to fall under Microsoft's trademark, which incidentally is "Microsoft Windows".

Yes, Mr. Robertson has taken code, ideas, architecture, debug work, and time, with the idea of making a profit. Apparently, with no intention of repaying the community. Now he comes to us, asking for help, as if her were one of our own.