What price do you want?

[Jef Spaleta]

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
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20030926/14d9b85c/attachment-0002.bin