though I thought that fee was only to cover distribution costs. I don't think the price of redhat enterprise is just to cover the distribution costs. On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 08:08:04PM -0500, Jacob Schmude wrote: > Hi > Actually, that's not true. The gpl states that anyone may charge money for a product, as long as the source is distributed with it. The gpl doesn't say that the > product has to be freely downloadable, it says that the source must be provided and that the user has the right to modify it. Many people seem to interpret this > as the product must be available at no cost, which is not true. RH is completely entitled to charge money for enterprise linux and not make it freely > downloadable, so long as they provide the source code with it. As the FSF says: think free speech not free beer. > HTH > On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 15:20:48 -0600 (CST), Nick Gawronski wrote: > > >Hi, You won't need to buy redhat enterprize linux if you don't want to. > >The new version will be freely downloadable and if it is not then that > >is a violation of the gpl. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Speakup mailing list > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup -- Who is General Failure and why is he reading my hard disk?
