On 10/21/2011 12:37 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: > On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Gary Greene > <ggreene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>>> I've never quite understood how anything containing any GPL-covered >>>> code could have any redistribution/use restrictions added. >>>> >>> Trust me ... the Linux Foundation thinks it is OK, so we are SOL. >> >> I'd rather get the opinion of the FSF (those whom wrote the license) instead >> of LF, as they don't matter as much, really. > > You'd need a copyright owner to initiate legal action. And the FSF > generally is more concerned about source availability although > binaries are clearly derived from source and covered by the same > copyright, and I can't see any exception at least in GPLv2 about being > able to put additional redistribution/use restrictions on covered > binaries. > They are not restricting your right to distribute, they are restricting your access to RHN if you choose to distribute.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
