2008/10/4 M.S.Yatnatti CEO KPN UNLIMITD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > My research on the GPL in regards with trademarks in respect to the question > is this. > Please read the link carefully > http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html > There are Three paragraphs under the caption Trademarks and they are > very clear and they are part of Guidelines for Free System > Distributions and not guide lines for making commercial distribution > or a proprietary OS out of GPLed software .Please make note of this > point .Please note that you cannot make commercial distribution out > of Guidelines for Free System Distributions .These guidelines don't
I would suggest you to read the GPL itself fully. Section 5 says http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html "A compilation of a covered work with other separate and independent works, which are not by their nature extensions of the covered work, and which are not combined with it such as to form a larger program, in or on a volume of a storage or distribution medium, is called an "aggregate" if the compilation and its resulting copyright are not used to limit the access or legal rights of the compilation's users beyond what the individual works permit. Inclusion of a covered work in an aggregate does not cause this License to apply to the other parts of the aggregate." RHEL is an aggregation of GPL software. As long as the aggregate license does not restricts the rights granted to individual components under GPL, the aggregate itself does not have to be GPL. > tell you violate freedom given at > http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html .It states that > Similarly, the distribution itself may hold particular trademarks. It > is not a problem for these marks to be in the distribution, as long > as they can be readily removed without losing the system's > functionality. It means that let RHEL provide menu in the system > itself that with click of mouse trade mark can be removed readily > without affecting system's functionality and user can use it and > distribute it. You cannot ask user to do it. It says readily means > readily users should be able to remove it. Because paragraph two says > In extreme cases, these restrictions may effectively render the > program non free .It is unfair for someone to ask you to remove a > trademark from modified code if that trademark is scattered all > throughout the original source. As long as the conditions are > reasonable, however, free system distributions may include > these programs, either with or without the trademarks. But you cannot > use trademarks to make system non-free as per GPL. Holding the > trademark is different and however, free system distributions may > include these programs, either with or without the trademarks. but > redhat making RHEL non free and commercial is different. which I > feel is the violation of GPL in two counts one at > http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html > and > http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html. > That is not allowing redistribution and making commercial > distribution RHEL using all GPLed software violating Guidelines for "A program is commercial if it is developed as a business activity. A commercial program can be free or non-free, depending on its license. Likewise, a program developed by a school or an individual can be free or non-free, depending on its license. The two questions, what sort of entity developed the program and what freedom its users have, are independent." "Free commercial software is a contribution to our community, so we should encourage it." http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Commercial Selling support is a way of making money from Free Software. Are you implying that only people creating proprietary software needs to get paid? We are not talking about Free Beer here. Here you have two complaints about RHEL 1) It does not allow redistribution Existence of CentOS is a clear indication that your assumption is false. 2) RHEL is a commercial distribution There is nothing wrong with that, on the contrary it is encouraged. I get the issue. You have a dilemma 1) I don't want to pay money to Red Hat 2) I want to get full support from Red Hat You can't have both at the same time, because you have to pay Red Hat to get full support. But if you don't care about support, what is stopping you from using CentOS? -- പ്രവീണ് അരിമ്പ്രത്തൊടിയില് <GPLv2> I know my rights; I want my phone call! <DRM> What use is a phone call, if you are unable to speak? (as seen on /.) Join The DRM Elimination Crew Now! http://fci.wikia.com/wiki/Anti-DRM-Campaign _______________________________________________ ilugd mailinglist -- [email protected] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
