[CentOS] RHEL on The Pirate Bay, Mininova, etc
Stephen John Smoogen
smooge at gmail.com
Sun Mar 23 20:26:16 UTC 2008
On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 2:08 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> wrote:
> Johnny Hughes wrote:
> >
> >>> copyright law?
> >>>
> >>> Well ... the general consensus is that is not the case, and that the
> >>> SPEC file is covered under the same license as the rest of the source
> >>> code unless it is specifically licensed differently.
> >>>
> >>> So, distributing the RPMS (the GPL ones) would probably be OK.
> >>>
> >>> Using them is also OK, so long as you PAY Red Hat on every machine
> >>> where you use things that cam from RHN.
> >>
> >> By why is adding a restriction to enforce that OK, unless it only
> >> applies to the non-GPL'd portions?
> >>
> > It is not a restriction, it is a agreement ... if you want to download
> > the file from them, you agree to pay for it every place you use it.
>
> Agreeing to a restriction doesn't make it any less of a restriction, and
> it isn't the end user's agreement that matters, it is the one doing the
> software redistribution that can't add restrictions.
>
Agreements and restrictions have separate legal definitions. You
really need to get a lawyer to explain this clearly to you, as it is
one of those items where it looks like they are saying 1+1=0 and
1-1=2, but they aren't.
Beyond that, we will just have to disagree.
--
Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator
How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed
in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice"
More information about the CentOS
mailing list