!--
@page { size: 8.5in 11in; margin: 0.79in }
P { margin-bottom: 0.08in }
--
Dear Mr Sandip,
I have noted down your points. Thanks for your valuable feed back. Slow and
steady wins the race .I am getting lot of responses and e-mails .I shall go on
natural way of debating without fearing .Web is big information super high way.
Brickbats or Bouquets All opinions are welcome . You can post your comments
.All comments are respected .I am preparing a table in which I shall list the
name of the person with his e-mail ID.I shall list GPL point by point. Against
each point I am noting Redhat favorable comments by each if any /Noting points
against redhat policy by each if any /Redhat comments on each point and
compile the full table. After making compilation I shall submit it to National
Law University in Bangalore and request them to conduct a debate in the
University in public interest .I know they conduct seminars on Copyrights IP
Trademarks FOSS and GPL and Law. I shall submit my report to LUG D and Linux
for you editor. They can guide me. The
debate is very important as( whether we need GPL any more or GPL is strong
enough to defend internal threats).Internal threat are greater damaging than
external threats .If all companies adopt Redhat trademark policy of RHEL and
lock the Linux distribution who will contribute free code for these Locked
Linux distributions . Who does not want to make money if it easy to twist the
GPL Redhat way .The dream of Linux creater Linus Torvalds and Richard stallman
of FSF will get shattered .GPL should not be allowed to become laughing stock
in front of public. Layman does not understand twisting of GPL. They only
understand four freedoms of GPL. One more view on GPL.: GPL does not restrict
any one to make commercial gains out of FLOSS.GPL only advocates that follow
the GPL copyright License in letter and spirit and earn money by consulting
support and services .Any one any company can get monetary benefit consulting
support and services.Redhat can
use its trade mark for consulting support and services and training. like any
other international companies uses .RHCE certification is in most demand. As
per industry reports IBM earns about 60 Billions only on services per
year..Most international Indian and Bangalore companies are making money in
millions of dollars only in consulting support and services and IT Training
.They go by laws of copyright laws and trademarks laws strictly . Basically
the project involves three components. consulting support and services and
Software and Hardware other infrastructure .These companies provide consulting
support and services for all technologies .Once you submit the project it is
the customer who finally select the the technology. Now customers go for mix
technologies .So companies provide consulting support and services on any
technologies let be it be Microsoft or Unix or Linux (may it be Ubuntu or
Redhat or Debian or SUSE OR Fedora ) or other
technologies .Today it is virtualisation era .On single hardware companies can
put in data centers all Linux distributions all versions or any proprietary OS
any software free or non free on single server..They can run all Linux
distributions at time in single server without rebooting the machine. Service
providers are ready to put anything for customers. Even redhat can gain
commercially by consulting support and services instead of Locking the front
Gate of Gnu Linux distribution called RHEL which is derived version of Fedora
is a Linux based operating system that provides users with access to the
latest free and open source software, in a stable, secure and easy to manage
form. Fedora strongly believe in the bedrock principles that created all the
components of operating system, and because of this fedora project guarantee
that Fedora will always be free for anybody, anywhere, to use, modify and
distribute. Another striking difference of Fedora
is its goal to empower others to pursue their vision of what a free operating
system should be like. Fedora now forms the basis for derivative distributions
such as Red Hat Enterprise Linux , the One Laptop Per Child XO and Creative
Commons' Live Content DVDs. But Redhat which makes the derived version of
Fedora in the name of RHEL closed the gates for redistribution with a seemingly
trademark key and Lock. even though it knows the fundamentals of FLOSS. The
funniest part of Redhat policy is GPL fundamentals are OK for Fedora and its
gate is open. But not OK for RHEL as its gate is locked ..
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (or RHEL) is a commercial derivative of Fedora
tailored to meet the requirements of enterprise customers. It is a commercial
product from Red Hat which also sponsors Fedora as a community project. Fedora
is upstream for Red Hat Enterprise Linux but there are several other derivative
distributions available too. Upstream has open gate and downstream is Locked
gate. Double standards .Double crossing the community.
(http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/RHEL).As general principal what is OK for fedora
it should be OK for RHEL. Redhat has two faces .One face for fedora and another
face for RHEL. Customers are having brains .The companies should treat them
properly. They will ask hundred questions cannot fool them with terminologies
.They know what they are buying .Without violating the letter and spirit of GPL
Redaht can earn revenue by consulting support and services and training .As it
has created huge brand equity for Redhat name and and
it was not created by just by Locking the RHEL redistribution .In any case
CentOS has already opened the gate of RHEL .There is no harm if redhat opens
Locked gates of the RHEL now. Even RHEL is available for down load for user
with one month support free. After that customer is not paying he does not get
support. Partial gate is already open. from there he can link it to CentOS yum
repository. Why all this customers can directly take it from CentOS and connect
yum repository of CentOS for updates. RHEL Gate is opened in the name of
CentOS. Redhat should understand this public opinion. Instead of forcing the
open community for round about forced exercise of making centos why not redhat
open the gate in straight manner to satisfy FOSS World. This is result in
creating extra work for open community. .
I am not against the commercial benefits of FLOSS. It's important to not
confuse "FLOSS" and "non-commercial". To see why, let’s first define key terms,
“FLOSS” and “commercial”: Please visit
http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/commercial-floss.html FLOSS projects give their
users many more rights than proprietary products do. Most developers do this
with the expectation that others are likely to contribute back to the project
(with new/improved code, documentation, bug reports, and so on). Thus, most
“non-profit” FLOSS projects are actually trying to achieve financial gain it
just happens that they are trying to receive gains of additional/improved
software instead of money. As Linux creator Linus Torvalds noted in a 2003
letter to SCO, the U.S. Code Title 17, section 101 (the law that creates and
defines copyrights in the U.S.) explicitly defines the term “financial gain” as
including “receipt, or expectation of receipt, of anything of value,
including the receipt of other copyrighted works.” (Note the
irony of a Finnish software engineer having to explain U.S. law to a U.S.
Company.) Thus, while FLOSS projects may not receive money directly, they
typically do receive something of value in return -- namely, other copyrighted
works (improvements).
One more different view:Debian is different-Debian may have started out as a
Purest GPLed typical Linux distribution, but it is more than pure and purest as
described by Linux for you Magazine in recent article.. Other distributions,
especially commercial distributions like Red Hat and SUSE, still tend to treat
their Linux distribution like more traditional software products. Raw
materials, in the form of software from Free / Open Source projects, goes into
a black box where it is packaged and prepared by the vendor and comes out as if
under cellophane. The companies may provide the source code to their
packages, but they lock up their build and distribution processes tight by
playing tricks with GPL. They trade the complexity of the build, quality
assurance and distribution processes in exchange for money. The upside for
their customers; simpler access to Linux. The downside for their customers;
dependency on the distribution provider for new
technology, quality control and ongoing support. Linking to the
http://awtrey.com/tony/foss/debianisdifferent.php
My Research work on the question Is it illegal to redistribute RHEL ?shall
continue .I shall be collecting different views .Final conclusion shall
left to FOSS leaders and Redhat .I know that Redhat will respect majority public
opinion.
M.S.Yatnatti BangaloreKPN UNLIMITED Corporate Office:No.18/6, Executive
chambers, Cunningham Road, Bangalore – 560052. WEBSITE WWW.KPNUNLIMITED.ORG
_______________________________________________
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]/
