On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, Stuart Low wrote: > > If you are a customer of theirs they MUST give you the src. If not it is > > optional. The fact that they give non-customers anything is a bonus. One of > > the things I want to do one of these days is look to see if the srpms on > > rhn are different from those on the web site. I just have not had the time > > to diff them. My own opinion is that they are not but this is just a guess. > > I have been wrong before. :-) > > I was under the impression that since the software contained in the > SRPMS is GNU GPL covered (in most cases) Redhat would be required to > release the SRPMS anyway?
Well since IANAL you could be right but I do not think so. The GPL in part states: 6. Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to these terms and conditions. You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein. You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties to this License. Note the term recipient. It does not say you have to give it to anyone who wants it. There is nothing to stop said recipient from redistributing software licensed under the GPL but whether the Red Hat iso's are actually GPL'd software or not is an argument I do not wish to get involved in. The above is my $.02 and I am done with this thread since regardless of who is right or who is wrong nothing will be accomplished here. The standard advice of "If you need legal advice consult your lawyer" applies. Regards, .................Tom rhel-rebuild mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hosted at the University of Innsbruck, Austria
