An exceptionally well explained rant that I find myself in total agreement with.

  • UrbenLegend@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    The source code is still available via CentOS Stream though. Does the GPL cover having to give redistribution rights to the exact same code used to replicate a certain build of a product?

    • phase_change@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Does the GPL cover having to give redistribution rights to the exact same code used to replicate a certain build of a product?

      It does, and very explicitly and intentionally. What it doesn’t say is that you have to make that source code available publically, just that you have to make it available to those you give or sell the binary to.

      What Red Hat is doing is saying you have the full right to the code, and you have the right to redistribute the code. However, if you exercise that right, we’ll pull your license to our binaries and you lose access to code fixes.

      That’s probably legal under the GPL, though smarter people than me are arguing it isn’t. However, if those writing GPLv2 had thought of this type of attack at the time, I suspect it wouldn’t be legal under the GPL.

    • mo_ztt ✅@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m not asking them to make available the exact same code; nothing says they have to make RHEL available to anyone other than their customers. It’s conventional in the open source world to do so, but not required, and they’ve chosen not to because they have this business model of selling GPL software and making it difficult to obtain for free what they’re selling.

      Trying to make a profit through that business model is fine. Having that as their business model doesn’t give them the right to violate the license though. They are threatening their customers if their customers exercise their right to redistribute RHEL (with the apparent goal of making RHEL, the exact product, difficult to obtain for anyone other than their customers – basically building on other people’s work for free, without honoring the terms of free redistribution under which those people made their work available to Redhat for free).

      In GPL v2, the relevant text is in section 6:

      You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients’ exercise of the rights granted herein.