Ubuntu founder doesn't "get" enterprise Linux

[Les Mikesell]

Alan wrote:
>> The binaries can't be redistributed, the source must be modified before 
>> redistribution.  Mark is perfectly correct and does not attach any such 
>> restrictions to Ubuntu.
> 
> Actually if you take their code, totally mash it up and it says its
> "Ubuntu" you will get into trouble, just as if you do the same with Red
> Hat. In addition if you modify some packages (eg firefox) you are
> required to rename them usually again for trademark reasons.

You can take an unmodified firefox, add things to the distribution and 
redistribute, still calling it firefox.  I'm not sure how that would 
work with Ubuntu.


>>> Once again: If RHEL was CLOSED, CentOS CAN'T exist!
>> Saying it twice doesn't make it any more true. CentOS does what they do 
>> only because RHEL can't be freely redistributed as is.
> 
> It's not possible to "redistribute" Red Hat Enterprise Linux in that
> sense, because it isn't about bits on disks its a service, support and
> the like deal. How are you going to "redistribute" the telephone support
> service ... ?

So what's the point of prohibiting the code and update redistribution?

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com