David Jericho wrote:
I have no objection to paying for software, and I believe Red Hat is
worth decent money. Having said that, a yearly subscription is
hostile, not to mention a licensing agreement that is hostile and
untrusting, followed by a pricing structure that appears to be the sum
process of taking the USD value and applying an exchange rate. I know
of admins who are requesting things like site licenses, money in hand,
and are getting brushed off by sales reps.
I don't think RedHat's license is "hostile" in any way. It is
legaleeze. Sure it is confusing and complex, but the GPL is too, that
doesn't mean it is hostile.
This excerpt is straight from the RHAS 2.1 license:
------BEGIN EXCERPT from
Most of the Linux Programs are licensed pursuant to a Linux EULA that
permits Customer to copy, modify, and redistribute the software, in both
source code and binary code forms. With the exception of certain image
files identified below, the remaining Linux Programs are freeware or
have been placed in the public domain. Customer must review these Linux
EULAs carefully, in order to understand its rights and to realize the
maximum benefits available with Red Hat Enterprise Linux. Nothing herein
limits Customer's rights under, or grants Customer rights that
supersede, the terms of any applicable Linux EULA. Red Hat may provide
Red Hat Enterprise Linux or other software or content by means of Red
Hat Network or Red Hat Enterprise Network. Each software component has
its own applicable EULA and all content is provided subject to its own
Red Hat Enterprise Linux itself is a collective work under U.S.
Copyright Law. Subject to the trademark use limitations set forth below,
Red Hat grants Customer a license in this collective work pursuant to
the GNU General Public License.
------ END EXCERPT from
Attitudes like "If you can't afford it, it mustn't be a
only shows lack of understanding what business in the real world is
like. I cannot rationally burn up the annual salary for a junior
programmer on recurring subscription licenses for 10 development boxes
that may sit unused for a month at a time.
The sad thing I have to admit, is as a sane, professional, and
rational admin who has my, my users, and my employers interests at
heart, 64-bit Sun hardware and Solaris looks to be an attractive
proposition. At least it's not a bottomless money pit for services I
Do your research....
------BEGIN EXCERPT FROM
Like the Red Hat Linux products before it, Advanced Server contains
software from a variety of sources. The majority of it is open source
(using a variety of licenses, including the GPL), with a few packages
consisting of "redistributable" content.
This means that, like the Red Hat Linux products before it, the sources
for the software comprising Advanced Server will be available to anyone
wanting a copy. And -- as always -- any code written by Red Hat is
GPL'ed, with the sources being freely available.
However, unlike the Red Hat Linux products before it, we will not be
making ISO images freely available for Advanced server. However, if you
are a "1337 haxx0r d00d" with "m4d ski11z" (or even a mildly
sysadmin with a year or two of Linux experience), and you want to roll
your own, go for it. Shadowman recommends that you might consider
reviewing our trademark policies
) before doing
something like going into business selling it on eBay, however. Since
Java technology is part of Advanced Server, if you "roll your own",
you'll have to acquire a JRE/JDK yourself.
------END EXCERPT FROM