On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 12:47 PM, Ned Slider <ned at unixmail.co.uk> wrote: > >> The question is, how can a contract containing restrictions on what >> you can do with GPL covered content not invalidate your own right to >> redistribute, given that the GPL prohibits additional restrictions? >> > > As I understand, Red Hat's AUP is more about protecting content other > than sources and binaries that resides on RHN (yes, RHN is far more than > just a distribution channel for SRPMs/RPMs). Such content and material > is vital in supporting it's customers, and I believe the likes of Oracle > and Suse were leveraging such content to try to sell support to existing > RHEL customers. This is what Red Hat presumably seeks to stop. > OK, but then it should have specific exceptions for GPL content already 'protected' from such proprietary behavior and restrictions. What is the point of the GPL existing if companies are allowed to add restrictions when they redistribute? -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com