> -----Original Message----- > From: C Falconer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, 3 July 2003 11:21 a.m. > To: Linux Users Group > Subject: RE: areeee redhat is turning into M$!!! > > > On Thu, 2003-07-03 at 11:23, Guy Steven wrote: > > > Fair call. Bad burns, dud media can be replaced > > > relatively quickly, 99% of the time its the drive > > > optics that needs a clean. > > > > > > The problem i have is 95% of the code on these are not > > > developed by redhat staff. But a army of developers > > > working on there own time. > > > > > > Does this action not violate the GPL, by not letting > > > the software be redistrobuted? > > They are not saying you can't redistribute software. They > are saying you > > can't distribute software using the name RedHat. > > I will use the analogy I gave earlier. > > Its an interesting example, but mcdonalds burgers don't contain a GPL > kernel.... Thats where the analogy no longer holds.
Actually the absense of a licence makes the anology even stronger. There is absolutely no restriction placed on the purchaser of a burger as to what that person can do with it once they have purchased it. Nothing in the GPL obliges people to distribute the software.
