[WBEL-users] Redhat Legalese

[Milan Kerslager]

On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 12:52:42PM -0500, Hedemark, Magnus wrote:
> Ewan Mac Mahon [mailto:ecm103@york.ac.uk] said:
> 
> > Oh no they don't - they have to make the source available to 
> > anyone they
> > distribute the binaries to. 
> 
> You're mixing up two of their available options.
> 
> They either have to make it available (but to everyone, not just the people
> they distribute the binaries to), or when they distribute the binaries they
> can instead opt to include the source at the same time.
> 
> So if they are making the source available, it has to be available to
> everyone (GPL Section 3b).
> 
> If the goal is to only give the source to people they have given binaries
> to, then they must distribute them together (GPL Section 3a).
> 
> There is no option to only make the source available (post binary
> distribution) *and* only then to people you have distributed binaries to.

The simple reason for giving source to all with no restrictions is
because if one RH's customer take source (from RH), he can put these
SRPMS on any public FTP server (and because GPL noone can stop him).

So this is better to put SRPMS on FTP server by RH itself (they have
full control on what is published in this case [ie no modifiactions for
example]).

They are able to delay giving sources but they don't want to (this is
bussines decision).

See SUSE - they publish LiveEval without source files and you have to
wait 1-2 months for FTP edition. SUSE has bussines model with preventing
redistribution (ie. no source for installer, nocd-building utils for
free, no ISOs and more) and abusing users (because they want to sell CDs
to real customers and they do not want to have not-paying customers).

There is the difference and customer is able to preffer whatever he wants.

-- 
                        Milan Kerslager
                        E-mail: milan.kerslager@pslib.cz
                        WWW:    http://www.pslib.cz/~kerslage/