Tony Mountifield wrote:
In article <CALKwpEyuPRU5Az9xU_d_BrJc0m_E9XDLH1T5iuB2U8rvRZevTg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Brian Mathis <brian.mathis+centos@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
When Redhat announced the changes they made it very clear they were
trying to prevent other companies (like Oracle and Novell) who were
providing support to RHEL customers at reduced rates. They have never
said they were concerned with the free clones and in fact have helped
CentOS many times in the past (according to statements from the core
developers).
Redhat knows that the free distros help them maintain market share,
and gain customers who need full support eventually. The issues
CentOS are seeing are simply collateral damage to the larger war
against the other big companies who are trying to provide services by
cheating.
Except that the other day, Johnny posted this:
I can tell you that we have been contacted by upstream to make sure we
**UNDERSTAND** the new AUP restrictions on distribution. I can also
tell you that we (CentOS) are doing everything in our power to meet the
restrictions as they were explained to us.
which sounds like RH making it clear that their changes are aimed at CentOS too.
This sounds more like a butt covering exercise by lawyers, remember this
all comes from the USA where there are FAR TOO MANY lawyers.
To be able to enforce a possible claim under this AUP restriction, they
will need to show that those involved with use of the code, under this
new clause, understand and have been communicated with.......etc.
As I said, a butt covering exercise - rather than any expressed attempt
at intimidation or enforcement - just my $0.01 worth.
Pity... perhaps RH have had a change of manager somewhere...
Cheers
Tony
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
