[CentOS] [OT] RedHat's licence, CentOS rebuild

Johnny Hughes mailing-lists at hughesjr.com
Sat Aug 19 08:03:26 UTC 2006


On Fri, 2006-08-18 at 17:16 -0400, William Hooper wrote:
> Johnny Hughes wrote:
> > On Fri, 2006-08-18 at 16:32 -0400, William Hooper wrote:
> >
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> >
> >> 1) Point me to the clause in the GPL that says you have to give the
> >> source away to someone you didn't give binaries to.
> >
> >
> >
> > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#WhatDoesWrittenOfferValid
> 
> "If you commercially distribute binaries not accompanied with source code..."
> 
> All someone has to do is distribute binaries and source code together to
> their customers and they don't need to provide the source code to
> everyone.  RHN already provides RPMs and SRPMS.  A publicly accessible FTP
> site is not required.
> 

I didn't say that they had to provide a publicly available FTP site
(actually, I did say just the opposite in my original reply ... they
indeed do not have to provide that) ... however, since they distribute
Binary ISOs and Source ISOs separately (ie, as separate ISOs) they would
need to provide customers Source ISOs (in the future) if they legally
obtained Binary packages.

A customer is anyone who legally obtains the Binary ISO .. and it is any
legally obtained version.

RedHat does now, and always has meet all these requirements.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20060819/966e1290/attachment.sig>


More information about the CentOS mailing list