[CentOS] Vote For CentOS :)

[Les Mikesell]

On Thu, 2005-06-02 at 11:07, Lamar Owen wrote:
> On Thursday 02 June 2005 10:48, Les Mikesell wrote:
> > If your favorite choice is accepting a contract that imposes limits on
> > where you can install free software that itself has a license that says
> > additional restrictions cannot be imposed, then by all means pick RHEL.
> 
> RHEL's SLA does not in any way impose restrictions on where you can install 
> anything.  It does, however, place restrictions on where and how you can or 
> cannot use RHN and its entitlements;  that is, if you want to buy RHEL and 
> then install it on more machines than for which you have RHN entitlements, 
> you agree to forfeit your right to use the RHN entitlements; but in no case 
> do you lose the right to continue to use the RHEL installations you currently 
> have installed; you just are blocked from using the RHN service.  And you are 
> out the amount of money you paid for the entitlements; not a good bargain.

So a contract doesn't 'impose restrictions' because you could accept the
penalty of breaking the contract if you wanted?  If you look at it that
way, what could possibly impose a restriction?

> This is in contrast to say the Microsoft EULA where a license breach causes 
> you to not be able to use the Microsoft software at all from any machine.

That's a rather different case. The MS software doesn't start with a
license that ensures your right to copy it except in the case where
you impose additional restrictions.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
     lesmikesell at gmail.com