On 10/19/2010 05:37 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
Only on v3 license code. Most code is still under v2.
and what license is the distro shipped as ?
That is a very good question. The *support and subscriptions* are under RH's own license. The *code* in the packages are under the licenses of the people who wrote it (generally not RH) and range over Apache, Perl, BSD, GPL, and a few other licenses. If RH wants to *only* publish the GPL (and similarly licensed) code, they could do that. But they would have to go package-by-package and separate them out. The kernel itself is GPL v2, btw.
Also, there are legalise around exactly what is considered a product / code snippet / build script and distribution - which is what makes things like NDA's workable.
Actually, the GPL forbids using 'add on' agreements like NDAs that
And how does the GPL get involved in relationships and partnerships that exist between people ?
That is what it does. It *licenses* distribution between people. You can't say "it's under GPL - but you can't redistribute it because I've made you sign an NDA". It violates the license that *you* accepted to use it yourself in the first place. RH can only use code written by other people *if they accept the license it is published under*. Otherwise *RH* itself does not have the right to use it at all.