Tony Mountifield wrote: > In article <CALKwpEyuPRU5Az9xU_d_BrJc0m_E9XDLH1T5iuB2U8rvRZevTg at mail.gmail.com>, > Brian Mathis <brian.mathis+centos at betteradmin.com> wrote: > >> When Redhat announced the changes they made it very clear they were >> trying to prevent other companies (like Oracle and Novell) who were >> providing support to RHEL customers at reduced rates. They have never >> said they were concerned with the free clones and in fact have helped >> CentOS many times in the past (according to statements from the core >> developers). >> >> Redhat knows that the free distros help them maintain market share, >> and gain customers who need full support eventually. The issues >> CentOS are seeing are simply collateral damage to the larger war >> against the other big companies who are trying to provide services by >> cheating. >> > > Except that the other day, Johnny posted this: > > >> I can tell you that we have been contacted by upstream to make sure we >> **UNDERSTAND** the new AUP restrictions on distribution. I can also >> tell you that we (CentOS) are doing everything in our power to meet the >> restrictions as they were explained to us. >> > > which sounds like RH making it clear that their changes are aimed at CentOS too. > This sounds more like a butt covering exercise by lawyers, remember this all comes from the USA where there are FAR TOO MANY lawyers. To be able to enforce a possible claim under this AUP restriction, they will need to show that those involved with use of the code, under this new clause, understand and have been communicated with.......etc. As I said, a butt covering exercise - rather than any expressed attempt at intimidation or enforcement - just my $0.01 worth. > Pity... perhaps RH have had a change of manager somewhere... > > Cheers > Tony >