Alan McKinnon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Linux Warehouse, a division of Obsidian Systems
Good to know. > Some people just balk at any form of payment where Linux is > involved. It's usually a knee-jerk reaction as far as I can > see, I constantly have to remind people that both Canonical and Red Hat do not sell Linux, they sell subscriptions and service level agreements (SLAs). I don't know of any Canonical or Red Hat product that ceases functionality if not licensed, other than, in the case of Red Hat, the certificates that manage their subscriptions (i.e. RHN related, not sure about Canonical). In fact, in light of the recent VMware non-sense with "License Enforcement," several blog entries came about, including this one at Red Hat regarding "The Liability of License Enforcement." http://truthhappens.redhatmagazine.com/2008/08/13/the-liability-of-license-enforcement/ > and the conversation about it pretty much always ends > when I point out that the very first GPL'ed app in > it's first public version could only be gotten from RMS > himself and only if you sent a cheque first. True. Although even Canonical and Red Hat don't do that, and I don't think Novell does either on any of their GPL/community software (only their proprietary stack atop of it -- e.g., eDirectory, etc..., and I'm not even sure of that anymore, Ross?). _______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list lpi-examdev@lpi.org http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
