Re: Red Hat CEO: Go Ahead, Copy Our Software

[Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Johnny Hughes <johnny@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>>> OK you are really that stupid
>>>
>>> the GPL doe snot talk about binaries at all
>> Exactly my point.  Everything is about derived works.  So binaries
>> cannot be exempt from the requirement that the work as a whole can
>> only be distributed under a license that permits free redistribution
>> and that additional restrictions cannot be added.  If you want to
>> refute that, please quote the section stating what you think permits
>> it.
>>
>
> You CAN distribute both the Source and the Binaries under the GPL.  You
> CAN'T do that and be in accordance with the Terms of Service for RHN.

Really?  Are none of the trademark-restricted additions packaged into
GPLed items?  Or is redistributing the trademark OK as long as nothing
is changed?   If you could obtain a copy and didn't care about RNH,
could you ship straight RH binaries instead of rebuilding?

> So, you get to decide what you want to do.  RHN is the customer portal
> that gives you access to help, updates, support, etc.

It is all sort of a technicality anyway without an update source.
Given the vulnerabilities that are always shipped, it would be
somewhat insane to run the code at all without a reliable source of
updates.  Which I thank CentOS for providing...

-- 
   Les Mikesell
     lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos