cross-posted from: https://kbin.social/m/linux/t/91676

It’s been an exciting week for people who care about Linux distributions, FOSS licensing, FOSS distribution, FOSS business models, and the future of open source in general. Red Hat’s an…

  • iusearchbtw@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2023/jun/23/rhel-gpl-analysis/

    As we understand it, this contract clearly states that the terms do not intend to contradict any rights to copy, modify, redistribute and/or reinstall the software as many times and as many places as the customer likes (see §1.4). Additionally, though, the contract indicates that if the customer engages in these activities, that Red Hat reserves the right to cancel that contract and make no further contracts with the customer for support and update services. In essence, Red Hat requires their customers to choose between (a) their software freedom and rights, and (b) remaining a Red Hat customer. In some versions of these contracts that we have reviewed, Red Hat even reserves the right to “Review” a customer (effectively a BSA-style audit) to examine how many copies of RHEL are actually installed (see §10) — presumably for the purpose of Red Hat getting the information they need to decide whether to “fire” the customer.

    If you contractually limit user rights to redistribute the code, then how can you actually comply with the GPL? Redistribution isn’t an optional clause.

    • fruitywelsh@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      They don’t, but they won’t do further business with you if you choose to do so.

      The software and code you have is still fully yours though.