Buck wrote:
The way I see it, Red Hat distributes the GPL with the software, but they won't sell it unless the buyer signs a contract that contradicts it saying that they will lose all support if they distribute it or use it on more than one computer.
Ask your lawyer this question: Does the GPL demand or guarantee anything in regards to under what conditions BINARIES (object code or executable) are licensed for redistribution?
I see a lot of jibber-jabber in the GPL about how you must provide access to source code if you are distributing object or executable forms of the code. I don't see much discussion on guaranteeing the right to redistribute object code. But as soon as I can afford a legal department (like the one Red Hat has) I'll make it a point to have them scour the GPL to make sure that I have the right to sell and distribute binary code under a license that restricts the redistribution and use of that binary code in exchange for continued support and maintains of the binary code...you know sort of like Red Hat has done.
Red Hat provides the source code in the form of SRPMs for all GPL'd RHEL code. Only thing I can possibly see wrong with that is you'd need rpm or some other extraction tool to extract the source code....so providing rpm as a srpm is a sort of catch 22. Then again...isn't offering the source to tar, in a tarball the same sort of problem. I think the best answer to this paradox is found at the bottom of a tequila shot glass, which I will soon be searching.
-jef"soon...it will be time to sell my one unopened box of Mr. T cereal on ebay, and buy that Croatian summer home I've always wanted"spaleta
On Thu, 2003-09-25 at 22:05, Jef Spaleta wrote:
Red Hat provides the source code in the form of SRPMs for all GPL'd RHEL code. Only thing I can possibly see wrong with that is you'd need rpm
Indeed, the GPL *only* requires they provide the source to people they've provided the binaries to. RH offers the source to *anyone*, thus going a bit *beyond* the GPL in that regard.
What most fail to realize is that RH in RHEL have a few things such a a JRE they is NOT under GPL. Take those out, take out the RH Trademarks, and you can build/use/distribute the resulting distribution yourself. To lazy/busy to do that? Well, that's your choice.
Not too lazy or busy, I just don't know how. LOL
Buck
-----Original Message----- From: fedora-list-admin@redhat.com [mailto:fedora-list-admin@redhat.com] On Behalf Of Bill Anderson Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 6:20 PM To: fedora-list@redhat.com Subject: RE: What price do you want?
On Thu, 2003-09-25 at 22:05, Jef Spaleta wrote:
Red Hat provides the source code in the form of SRPMs for all GPL'd
RHEL
code. Only thing I can possibly see wrong with that is you'd need
rpm
Indeed, the GPL *only* requires they provide the source to people they've provided the binaries to. RH offers the source to *anyone*, thus going a bit *beyond* the GPL in that regard.
What most fail to realize is that RH in RHEL have a few things such a a JRE they is NOT under GPL. Take those out, take out the RH Trademarks, and you can build/use/distribute the resulting distribution yourself. To lazy/busy to do that? Well, that's your choice.