would someone kindly clarify this paragaph,please (RH business model)

[Elton Woo]

On October 27, 2003 04:35 pm, Martin Stricker , <Martin Stricker 
<shugal at gmx.de>> wrote:
> > 2) Either I strip Red Hat's trademarks from the code, or licence such
> > marks from Red Hat. AND clearly indicate this has been done.
> > 3) Charge only for the _physical_ media: CD or DVD disks, printed
> > manual(s), container.
>
> You may redistribute the binaries from Fedora Core because Red Hat does
> allow so. But you may *not* call it Fedora, Red Hat or other trademarks.
> The GPL is about source code, not trademarks or names. By the way, Red
> Hat decided you may not redistrinute the binaries of RHEL, but you could
> compile the source yourself and distribute those binaries (of course
> with another name). Red Hat isn't even required to make the source

... as per my point number 2) above...

I guess I can then say with confidence that I *do* understand the GPL in
general, and also as it relates to Red Hat's linux distribution.

Elton ;-)
-- 
http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/stats/team/team_4504.html
"You only live once: let's make life BETTER for each other."
LINUX User #193975 [AMD ATHLON CPU] ICQ #149608718.