[ale] Re: Red Hat scare tactics

[Michael D. Hirsch]

On Wednesday 15 October 2003 09:46 pm, Bob Toxen wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 14, 2003 at 03:19:31PM -0400, Michael D. Hirsch wrote:
> > On Thursday 09 October 2003 08:45 pm, Fulton Green wrote:
> > > Not that I'd ever talk about anything besides Red Hat on this list ...
> > >
> > > On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 06:03:29PM -0400, Michael D. Hirsch wrote:
> > > > On a related topic, has anyone looked at the forthcoming licensing
> > > > from RedHat?  They will no longer have freely downloadable ISOs.  The
> > > > cheapest desktop distribution from them will be $179 per system. 
> > > > Which comes with RHN updates, no support, no CD, no hardcopy manual.
>
> ...
> $179/sys or $179 total for all of an organization's systems still is
> cheaper than $199/sys for XP.

I haven't checked, but I suspect that the RHN is only provided for one system, 
not all of them.  In fact, I believe that they claim you can only install on 
one system, so the $179/sys if the proper estimate above.  It is cheaper that 
$199, but not by much.

OTOH, is is $179/sys/year.  That's right, it is a yearly fee.  With XP you are 
only expected to pay to upgrade every 2-5 years.  That makes XP cheaper.

> > > > I keep wondering what prevents someone from getting one license, then
> > > > capturing the RPMs from the update network and redistibuting them to
> > > > multiple systems.  RH seems to be trying to convince you that this is
> > > > a no-no, but I don't think they have a leg to stand on.
>
> I haven't looked at the recent licenses but the RH7.3 license points out
> that the Distribution has trademarked Red Hat logos embedded.  It is these
> logos that it is illegal to copy except under the terms of the license.

Okay, this makes some sense.  I'll look for this.

> I was hired by a company to strip these logos from a Red Hat distribution
> so that they could sell prebuilt systems to others without a royalty
> arrangement with Red Hat.  Red Hat considered this on the "up and up".
>
> I think, though, that Red Hat is right on the edge of the law w.r.t.
> the GPL that states that if you provide GPL'ed code to one other entity
> that you have to make it available to anyone for no more than a nominal
> fee.  I think that a fee of $20-50 for a CD or providing the GPL code
> for download in some reasonable form is needed to satisfy that requirement.

I think you are only obligated to provide the source to anyone you've provided 
binaries to.  And I believe that RH will provide source.  

> Red Hat saying that they offer it only as an ISO image but that you cannot
> burn CDs for others "due to trademarked logos on the image" may not be
> legal, in my non-legal opinion.

Thanks Bob.  That explanation makes more sense than any other I've heard.  I 
agree with you that they are treading on the edge of the GPL.  Kinda 
sad--they've always big such strong proponents of it in the past.  Now they 
seem to see it as an obstacle to their business.

Michael