The license which Linux is written under says that you either include source
code or let them know where they can get it, that you don't make changes
without acknowledging the author.
Redhat does not want you representing yourself as an RH representative, or
affiliate without having an agreement to do so. I.e. protecting their name.
The GNU License says in part:
" 1. You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's
source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you
conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate
copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty; keep intact all the
notices that refer to this License and to the absence of any warranty;
and give any other recipients of the Program a copy of this License
along with the Program.
"You may charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy, and
you may at your option offer warranty protection in exchange for a fee.
Myself I was so taken back by the statement that I thought wow this changes
things, until I realized that they CANNOT implement Linux so that it violates
the GNU license. Just don't walk around saying you are part of RH.
On Monday 17 June 2002 22:24, Anita Pesola wrote:
> Ok.....silly question time......I've been trying to ignore this thread
> but this post got my attention.....since Linux itself is supposed to be
> free, what's the big deal with unpaid for distros on new PCs? Or am I
> reading this entire thing wrong?
>
> Please, no flames---I'm just asking a silly question. :-)
>
> Anita
>
> Justin Keyes wrote:
> >On 16 Jun 2002, Seth Hollen wrote:
> >>one question to everyone... from what I am reading it sounds as if I
> >>build a box and buy a copy of RETAIL REDHAT 7.3, say from bestbuy, and
> >>install it, THEN sell it, I am breaking the law.
> >>is this correct?
> >
> >NO! That's the whole point this guy is missing! He wants to sell comp's
> >with _unpaid-for_ distros copied onto them!
> >
> >If you want to sell a computer legally, why not buy the OS?
> >
> >To the original complainer:
> >Stop spreading _complete_FUD_! If you are selling the systems, you have
> >to abide by the rules!
> >
> >And BTW, there's no way in hell it would be more expensive than an MS
> >solution.
> >
> >Justin Keyes / m9u35@yahoo.com
--Steve
_____________________________________________________________ HTML in e-mail is not safe. It let's spammers know to spam you, and sets you up for online attack through IE 4.5 and above. Using HTML promotes it as safe to the uninitiated.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 12:50:14 EDT