My school is thinking of installing linux on some of the computers, and were wondering if it's legal to use linux for non-private usage. I really didn't get what they meant but something about linux only beeing free if your going to install for yourself and not for a whole school or corporation or whatever.
So I'm wondering if it's allowed to get fedora for about 10 compters at my school the legal way. I always thought linux was free for everyone?
Thanks in advande
Danial Rehman wrote:
My school is thinking of installing linux on some of the computers, and were wondering if it's legal to use linux for non-private usage. I really didn't get what they meant but something about linux only beeing free if your going to install for yourself and not for a whole school or corporation or whatever.
So I'm wondering if it's allowed to get fedora for about 10 compters at my school the legal way. I always thought linux was free for everyone?
Linux itself is free for everyone. Some distributions may additionally include proprietary software that is not free for everyone, but Fedora is not one of those distributions. You can install it on as many machines as you like.
Paul.
My school is doing a similar project (our computers were recently replaced, so the computer club got some trash-can-donations :) ). We're also writing a grant request to expand into a miniature lab.
We're running FC2 and FC3 on all of 'em, so if Linux (and Fedora) aren't free, somebody had better tell me now ;-)
On Fri, 2005-01-28 at 16:37 +0100, Danial Rehman wrote:
My school is thinking of installing linux on some of the computers, and were wondering if it's legal to use linux for non-private usage. I really didn't get what they meant but something about linux only beeing free if your going to install for yourself and not for a whole school or corporation or whatever.
So I'm wondering if it's allowed to get fedora for about 10 compters at my school the legal way. I always thought linux was free for everyone?
---- free as in speech AND free as in beer
Fedora information can be found at: http://fedora.redhat.com/
License info can generally be found here: http://fedora.redhat.com/licenses/
Specific End User License Agreement for Fedora Core: http://fedora.redhat.com/licenses/eula.html
There are trademark and other restrictions if you plan on 'repackaging' for other purposes and or selling it - mostly GNU type restrictions.
But specifically to answer your question, you may install on as many of your school (or corporate) computers as you wish.
Craig
Craig White wrote:
On Fri, 2005-01-28 at 16:37 +0100, Danial Rehman wrote:
My school is thinking of installing linux on some of the computers, and were wondering if it's legal to use linux for non-private usage. I really didn't get what they meant but something about linux only beeing free if your going to install for yourself and not for a whole school or corporation or whatever.
So I'm wondering if it's allowed to get fedora for about 10 compters at my school the legal way. I always thought linux was free for everyone?
free as in speech AND free as in beer
Fedora information can be found at: http://fedora.redhat.com/
License info can generally be found here: http://fedora.redhat.com/licenses/
Specific End User License Agreement for Fedora Core: http://fedora.redhat.com/licenses/eula.html
There are trademark and other restrictions if you plan on 'repackaging' for other purposes and or selling it - mostly GNU type restrictions.
But specifically to answer your question, you may install on as many of your school (or corporate) computers as you wish.
Craig
I'll second the above.
I quote the relevant text of the Fedora Core license:
"2. Intellectual Property Rights. The Software and each of its components, including the source code, documentation, appearance, structure and organization are copyrighted by Fedora Project and others and are protected under copyright and other laws. Title to the Software and any component, or to any copy, modification, or merged portion shall remain with the aforementioned, subject to the applicable license. The “Fedora” trademark is a trademark of Red Hat, Inc. (“Red Hat”) in the U.S. and other countries and is used by permission. This agreement permits User to distribute unmodified copies of Software using the Fedora trademark on the condition that User follows Red Hat's trademark guidelines located at http://fedora.redhat.com/legal/. User must abide by these trademark guidelines when distributing the Software, regardless of whether the Software has been modified. If User modifies the Software, then User must replace all images containing the “Fedora” trademark. Those images are found in the anaconda-images and the fedora-logos packages. Merely deleting these files may corrupt the Software."
Note carefully: "This agreement permits User to distribute unmodified copies of Software using the Fedora trademark on the condition that User follows Red Hat's trademark guidelines." If you're not going to modify Fedora Core--and it doesn't sound as though you're trying to build a new distro--then you can install on however many computers you own or are otherwise responsible for, in any setting whatever.
I have never run across a distro that requires a "per-seat" license fee. In fact, Linux does not distribute for a /license/ fee at all--but only for a one-shot donative or a subscription fee for either regular updates or technical support or both. Such agreements cover every single computer that the end user is responsible for. Even RHEL, as expensive as it is, charges a fee /per site/ and not per seat.
Fedora Core charges no fees at all. That's because technical support is by volunteers, and they're on this list (or should be).
What kind of school are you running? Does it by any chance teach /advanced/ computer science? If so, did you think about setting up a user's group to deal with technical issues? The more brains, the merrier.
Temlakos
----- Original Message ----- From: "Temlakos" temlakos@gmail.com To: "For users of Fedora Core releases" fedora-list@redhat.com Sent: Friday, January 28, 2005 10:23 AM Subject: Re: Installing fedora at school
Even RHEL, as expensive as it is, charges a fee /per site/ and not per seat.
No, it is per installation (i.e. per seat). We have a large number (well over 1,000) RHEL servers installed at work. Believe me when I say we paid a license fee to RH for every one of them. :-)
Thomas
Danial Rehman wrote:
My school is thinking of installing linux on some of the computers, and were wondering if it's legal to use linux for non-private usage. I really didn't get what they meant but something about linux only beeing free if your going to install for yourself and not for a whole school or corporation or whatever.
Scary what some think about Linux in general.
So I'm wondering if it's allowed to get fedora for about 10 compters at my school the legal way. I always thought linux was free for everyone?
Thanks in advande
On Friday 28 January 2005 23:39, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
Danial Rehman wrote:
My school is thinking of installing linux on some of the computers, and were wondering if it's legal to use linux for non-private usage. I really didn't get what they meant but something about linux only beeing free if your going to install for yourself and not for a whole school or corporation or whatever.
Scary what some think about Linux in general.
So I'm wondering if it's allowed to get fedora for about 10 compters at my school the legal way. I always thought linux was free for everyone?
Thanks in advande
But, while you find it 'scary what some people think' you done have nothing to assuage the posters fears.
The only thing thats really unusual about the GPL is that you ARE free to copy it and give it away as many times as you can find takers for, AND if you improve it AND deploy that improvement off the premises, then you are also bound to GIVE those improvements away to anyone who asks, for not more than a small fee to cover the cost of the media you put it on, and your time to record that media. I've seen $2 a cd mentioned. But that set of cd's is not serial numbered, and can be used to install on as many machines as you like. All perfectly legal.
The first thing that anyone contemplating a new piece of software, any kind of software, whether its COTS, linux, or something you've contracted with someone to write for you if you cannot write it yourself, is the licenseing. So go have the schools attorney take a look at the GPL, and discount anything he says that references his in-ability to make a buck from it other than what he charges you as a consultation fee. I do not think any sensible legal beagle can say anything bad about it given that constraint.
Thats not to say that the very low cost is the only cost, primarily because those who have the skills to install and configure it have to eat, make the car payment, pay the rent/mortgage, utils etc, so they will need to be paid at some point in the budget. But, if we are talking 25 or more machines, his salary will be peanuts compared to the dues M$ will charge you, and you will *still* need that knowledgeable person to install and maintain them.
IMO, going with linux is a no-brainer, you don't have to pay "the microsoft tax" per annum ever again. And by judicius use of the schools purchasing power, buying fresh machines without any windows installed will typically save around a hundred per machine, often more if you build them yourself from the parts houses. Or for that same budgeted price, you can get much more machine. Its up to you and your technical types. The bottom line should be a generalized reduction in total $ spent at the end of the budgetary year, after year. There will also be a certain amount of pride in teaching the students that windows is not the only operating system on the planet. And that is worth a lot just in the educational aspects alone.
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 09:52:54 -0600 m g tsilims@gmail.com wrote
My school is doing a similar project (our computers were recently replaced, so the computer club got some trash-can-donations :) ). We're also writing a grant request to expand into a miniature lab.
We're running FC2 and FC3 on all of 'em, so if Linux (and Fedora) aren't free, somebody had better tell me now ;-)
That'll be $666.66 a seat. My sales crew will contact you on Monday.
;-P
(Check the headers before responding, please.)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 29-Jan-2005/00:44 -0500, Gene Heskett gene.heskett@verizon.net wrote:
The only thing thats really unusual about the GPL is that you ARE free to copy it and give it away as many times as you can find takers for, AND if you improve it AND deploy that improvement off the premises, then you are also bound to GIVE those improvements away to anyone who asks, for not more than a small fee to cover the cost of the media you put it on, and your time to record that media.
[snip]
Actually, you only have to make the code available to anyone to whom you provided the binary. That may seem like a small point, but it allows individuals and organizations to use GPL'd software as a base for modified internal-use-only versions.
Tony - -- Anthony E. Greene mailto:Anthony%20E.%20Greene%20%3Ctony@greene-family.org%3E AOL/Yahoo Messenger: TonyG05 HomePage: http://www.greene-family.org/tony/ OpenPGP Key: 0x6C94239D/7B3D BD7D 7D91 1B44 BA26 C484 A42A 60DD 6C94 239D Linux. The choice of a GNU generation http://www.linux.org/
On Monday 31 January 2005 18:59, Anthony E. Greene wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 29-Jan-2005/00:44 -0500, Gene Heskett gene.heskett@verizon.net
wrote:
The only thing thats really unusual about the GPL is that you ARE free to copy it and give it away as many times as you can find takers for, AND if you improve it AND deploy that improvement off the premises, then you are also bound to GIVE those improvements away to anyone who asks, for not more than a small fee to cover the cost of the media you put it on, and your time to record that media.
[snip]
Actually, you only have to make the code available to anyone to whom you provided the binary. That may seem like a small point, but it allows individuals and organizations to use GPL'd software as a base for modified internal-use-only versions.
One would normally assume that off the premises means binary, or in whatever format is executed/interpreted/etc.
Tony
Anthony E. Greene mailto:Anthony%20E.%20Greene%20%3Ctony@greene-family.org%3E AOL/Yahoo Messenger: TonyG05 HomePage: http://www.greene-family.org/tony/ OpenPGP Key: 0x6C94239D/7B3D BD7D 7D91 1B44 BA26 C484 A42A 60DD 6C94 239D Linux. The choice of a GNU generation http://www.linux.org/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Anthony E. Greene mailto:tony@greene-family.org 0x6C94239D
iD8DBQFB/sZ1pCpg3WyUI50RAop6AJ99qIk1qyRZndTj+n/k+2Q3yA7rVACgl7+L xR0OmIHsZ0vO7mdZEGg6nf8= =Q2ep -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Mon, 2005-01-31 at 20:10 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
On Monday 31 January 2005 18:59, Anthony E. Greene wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 29-Jan-2005/00:44 -0500, Gene Heskett gene.heskett@verizon.net
wrote:
The only thing thats really unusual about the GPL is that you ARE free to copy it and give it away as many times as you can find takers for, AND if you improve it AND deploy that improvement off the premises, then you are also bound to GIVE those improvements away to anyone who asks, for not more than a small fee to cover the cost of the media you put it on, and your time to record that media.
[snip]
Actually, you only have to make the code available to anyone to whom you provided the binary. That may seem like a small point, but it allows individuals and organizations to use GPL'd software as a base for modified internal-use-only versions.
One would normally assume that off the premises means binary, or in whatever format is executed/interpreted/etc.
I think his point is that you _can_ modify the original & use your changed code without making the changes available to others _unless_ you distribute the changed code (then binaries and source must both be available).
Also, as he said, the changes only have to be freely distributed to those who have received the binaries, not to the entire world. This may seem a fine point but makes it possible to use the modified code within an enterprise without giving it to the world.
In practicality, distributing modified GPL software means the modified code must carry the GPL license as well, but his fine point is well taken and must be considered.
Tony
Anthony E. Greene mailto:Anthony%20E.%20Greene%20%3Ctony@greene-family.org%3E AOL/Yahoo Messenger: TonyG05 HomePage: http://www.greene-family.org/tony/ OpenPGP Key: 0x6C94239D/7B3D BD7D 7D91 1B44 BA26 C484 A42A 60DD 6C94 239D Linux. The choice of a GNU generation http://www.linux.org/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Anthony E. Greene mailto:tony@greene-family.org 0x6C94239D
iD8DBQFB/sZ1pCpg3WyUI50RAop6AJ99qIk1qyRZndTj+n/k+2Q3yA7rVACgl7+L xR0OmIHsZ0vO7mdZEGg6nf8= =Q2ep -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) 99.32% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly Yahoo.com attorneys please note, additions to this message by Gene Heskett are: Copyright 2005 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
Jeff Vian wrote (about the GPL):
I think his point is that you _can_ modify the original & use your changed code without making the changes available to others _unless_ you distribute the changed code (then binaries and source must both be available).
Also, as he said, the changes only have to be freely distributed to those who have received the binaries, not to the entire world. This may seem a fine point but makes it possible to use the modified code within an enterprise without giving it to the world.
In practicality, distributing modified GPL software means the modified code must carry the GPL license as well, but his fine point is well taken and must be considered.
Ah. A GPL misconceptions thread.
If you distribute GPLed binaries with the source code (having them together on the same website is fine), then you don't have to give anything to anyone later (GPL 3a). If you non-commercially distribute unmodified binaries, you merely have to pass on the offer of source you received (GPL 3c).
But if you modify GPL programs, and distribute binaries without source, then you *do* have to "give any third party ... a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code". Yes, that means the entire world (GPL 3b).
As far as "use in the enterprise" is concerned, it depends on who owns the computers on which the program is installed. (The "you" in the GPL refers to the licensee, which in a business is normally the business itself).
The thing is, that if a company installs GPLed software on its own computers, then the company itself is the recipient, not whoever may use the computer.
If you have modified a GPL program, then by default you have copyright in the changes. If you are not prepared to release those changes under the GPL, then no-one can distribute the resulting program: for company-specific variants, this may be exactly what is wanted.
You yourself are quite entitled to use the resulting work.
See http://www.fsf.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLRequireSourcePostedPublic for further details.
James.
-
Anthony E. Greene -
Arthur Pemberton -
Craig White -
Danial Rehman -
Darl -
Gene Heskett -
James Wilkinson -
Jeff Vian -
m g -
Paul Howarth -
Temlakos -
thomas cameron