Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Red Hat License Challenged

Posted by michael on from the challenge-is-good dept.

An anonymous reader writes: "David McNett has noticed an apparent discrepancy between the Red Hat Linux EULA and the GPL. He has written an open letter to the FSF asking for their opinion on the matter. Does Red Hat have the right to "audit your facilities and records" to ensure compliance with their license?" McNett misreads the Red Hat documents. Their contract is for the various services, not the software, and for the services they are entitled to demand whatever concessions they think the market will bear.

10 of 391 comments (clear)

  1. I love /. by gergi · · Score: 5, Funny

    So now the /. editors are posting stories that they are going to immediately refute and say isn't a story at all? I love this place :).

    More amazing is that this story will generate hundreds of comments.

    --
    Nosce te Ipsum
    1. Re:I love /. by ckaminski · · Score: 2, Funny
      is the admonition to not read the linked story?

      As if anyone actually READS the linked stories anyway...

  2. Well... by FoxIVX · · Score: 4, Funny

    At least things are getting more efficient around here. The editors are posting bogus news stories, then retracting them themselves before someone points it out. I call that progress!

    1. Re:Well... by jmv · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeh, still trying to figure out what is new in that. It's like: "Cure for Cancer discovered! No in fact, it doesn't work. Never mind.".

      --
      Opus: the Swiss army knife of audio codec
    2. Re:Well... by will_die · · Score: 4, Funny

      But it does give them a better track record then the New York Times.

  3. Right on by bahamat · · Score: 3, Funny

    Way to go Michael, for publicly spanking that boy.

    This could have easily been relegated to "not news" since it's apparent that McNett simply misunderstood. But I'm all for public humiliation, especially here on /. where we all can ridicule him for his mistake.

  4. Re: Why was this even posted? by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1, Funny


    > you meant "Staff that mutters"

    I first started reading Slashdot because I thought they were going to have "Nudes for Nerds".

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  5. Re:Editors...say it with me...EDITORS...Very good! by keiferb · · Score: 3, Funny

    > Cool thing about /. is your can post your own reply AND other people actually READ them!

    Yeah, now if only we could get them to read the -articles- too...

  6. The moral of the story... by smyle · · Score: 3, Funny
    ...is that if you're buying RedHat support for only "some" of your servers, be sure your other servers use another distro.

    Hmmm... I don't think that's what RedHat wants, but it seems to be the end result. I would think that they would come up with some scheme to label "THIS" box as the one that's suppored rather than sending their customers elsewhere.

    --

    Sleep is just a poor substitute for caffeine, anyway. -Bob Lehmann

  7. ALERT! Linux vendor trying to make a profit! by fmaxwell · · Score: 2, Funny

    Is the Redhat license in conflict with the GPL? I don't know and don't have the time, or legal credentials, to tell you.

    What I see is a "free software" advocate raising a ruckus because he has found a clause that may require that he buy one copy of RedHat's Advanced Server (now called Red Hat Enterprise Linux AS) Linux for each PC on which he installs it.

    Now this isn't a run-of-the-mill version of Linux designed for use on desktop PCs. It's described by RedHat as the "ultimate solution for large departmental and datacenter servers." Heaven forbid that a corporation which operates large departmental and datacenter servers has to pay for a version of Linux tailored to those applications!

    A large segment of the Linux community seems hell-bent on using GPL to insure that no Linux vendor ever be able to devise a sustainable, viable business model. It's at times like these that I really appreciate the BSD license.