On Wed, 19 Jul 2023 15:41:44 +0000, Kevin Mckenzie <kmcke...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> 2. RedHat is not moving to closed source. RedHat couldn't make RHEL closed
> source if they wanted to. RedHat doesn't own the copyright to something like
> 90% of RHEL, and whatever copyright they do own, they've assigned to the
> Linux Foundation and the like. I guess in theory, RedHat could create a
> closed-source fork of Linux and rewrite the 90% of the code they never owned,
> and not contribute future code to the open source world, but that seems like
> a huge amount of work for not a lot of reward.
Right. The Linux Kernel is licensed under the GNU General Public License
Version 2, which states, in part,
<quote>
2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion of it,
thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and distribute such
modifications or work under the terms of Section 1 above, provided that you
also meet all of these conditions:
a) You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices stating
that you changed the files and the date of any change.
b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or
in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be
licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this
License.
c) If the modified program normally reads commands interactively when run,
you must cause it, when started running for such interactive use in the most
ordinary way, to print or display an announcement including an appropriate
copyright notice and a notice that there is no warranty (or else, saying that
you provide a warranty) and that users may redistribute the program under these
conditions, and telling the user how to view a copy of this License.
(Exception: if the Program itself is interactive but does not normally print
such an announcement, your work based on the Program is not required to print
an announcement.)
These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If identifiable
sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and can be reasonably
considered independent and separate works in themselves, then this License, and
its terms, do not apply to those sections when you distribute them as separate
works. But when you distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a
work based on the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms
of this License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the entire
whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who wrote it.
</quote>
AFAIK, most of the rest of what we colloquially refer to as "Linux" is actually
the GNU Operating System and is covered under version 3 of the GPL, which has
similar language.
--
Tom Marchant
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
