RedHat 9 and RHCE

[Darrell Shandrow]

Hi Cecil,

Unfortunately, Red Hat's training material does not qualify under 17 U.S.C.
Section 121 since it is not published for general sell to the public.  It is
only for Red Hat's customers.

Provision of the material to Bookshare, or possible use of Bookshare type
digital rights management was certainly one of the solutions I provided to
Red Hat.  Unfortunately, Red Hat is in absolutely no way interested in
cooperating with the blind community to improve access.  Rejection of all
solutions provided represents the ultimate evidence of Red Hat's contempt of
us blind people as sub-human.

Darrell Shandrow - Shandrow Communications!
Technology consultant/instructor, network/systems administrator!
A+, CCNA, Network+!
Check out high quality telecommunications services at http://ld.net/?nu7i
All the best to coalition forces carrying out Operation Iraqi Freedom!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Whitley GS11 Cecil H" <WhitleyCH at cherrypoint.usmc.mil>
To: <speakup at braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2003 12:22 PM
Subject: RedHat 9 and RHCE


> > Hi Aaron,
> > Perhaps RedHat needs to familiarize themselves with 17 U.S.C 121.
> > Individuals with a provable print disability can legally accomodate
> > themself, or optionally have some other provider (bookshare.org, NLS,
etc)
> > do it for them.  This does not require the permission of the copyright
> > holder.  This of course is only applicable to persons within the U.S.
If
> > you are outside the U.S. then whatever copyright provisions are made by
> > treaty apply.    Given that RedHat Enterprise server is now a DOD COE
> > section 508 are applicable as well.  There are
> > support/training/documentation requirements in section 508.
> >
> > Now, as to RH 9 and speakup....  In reading over the 2.4.20-ac releases
I
> > recall that Alan Cox decided to pull speakup support.  It was a
> > "technical" call on his part.  His determination was that it didn't
belong
> > in the kernel.  This is my recollection at least.  He put it in in the
> > first place and later revisited that descision as a mistake.  So, with
> > that said, the argument then shifts from moral questions to technical
> > ones.  If access cannot be done in user space that needs to be brought
> > forward and fixed.  But that solution is a technical one, not a moral
one.
> > I do not know the technical issues and what approach is best, workable
or
> > optimal and so I will not judge his descision.  I leave that to those
who
> > are willing to buy into the argument with him through sweat equity.  So
in
> > short, RH 8 shipped with a "stock" kernel that happened to include
> > speakup.  Speakup has since been dropped from the "stock" kernel and
> > therefore does not appear in RH 9.  Of course RH does not ship "stock"
> > kernels, they "add" features, turn some on and others off (not remove!).
> >
> > So, in summary:
> > 1.  RedHat has legal obligations for accomodation and cannot prevent
some
> > unilateral actions by the print disabled community
> > 2.  Speakup appeared in RH 8 because it was in the "stock" kernel
> > 3.  Speakup was removed from the "stock" kernel with 2.4.20 final.
> > 4.  The descision to remove speakup was made by a kernel maintainer for
> > technical reasons.
> > 5.  Those with the skill and the time can argue with that maintainer and
> > provide patches that will bring speakup in compliance with what he
thinks
> > "should" be in a kernel, or at least comply with what he would accept
> > being in a "stock" kernel.
> > 6.  I wrote Alan and thanked him for the inclusion of speakup in 2.4.18.
> > I was disappointed at it's removal subsequently.  I feel that the kernel
> > needs to provide some accessability features either "always on" or "on
> > demand" and that it should be part of the mainstream kernel.  That itch
> > however is not adaquately strong that I scratch it.  Is yours?
> > 7.  RedHat shipped RH 9 in their normal fashion and did not remove any
> > accessability features.  They do not prevent you from applying whatever
> > you like to the kernel, they just don't do it for you.  See also item 6
> > above.
> > 8.  RedHat failing to accomodate one of their students is morally wrong.
> > In the U.S. it is also illegal.  ADA and others are reactive not
> > proactive.  If it bothers you that much, sue.  It should be noted that I
> > went through the MCSE courses for NT 4 and M.S. provided accessable
> > training materials to the company providing the training.  This may sway
> > RedHat in the future for their courses if someone else is headed down
that
> > path.  Cisco provides readers for their CCNA/CCNP/CCIE exams.  RedHat
may
> > prefer to lead rather than to follow.  Additionally, if they intend to
> > sell to the U.S. Government they need to comply with section 508 in
their
> > support, training and documentation.
> [Whitley GS11 Cecil H]
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup