this post was submitted on 22 Jun 2023
472 points (96.6% liked)

Linux

48655 readers
377 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 years ago (2 children)

The concern is that Red Hat terminates your account if you redistribute the source to another party. This feels like an additional restriction placed on the source code, which if it is, would indeed violate the GPL.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Now THIS is a GPL-violation or at least a serious concern and asshole move.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Serious concern and asshole move? Yes. Gpl violation? Not sure. You could argue you are not restricted to do whatever you want with the code you receive with a subscription. But if you share the code, they don't want you as a customer anymore and won't give you new code. I don't know if the GPL allows that.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This clearly goes against the intention of the GPL. Maybe not illegal.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

This clearly goes against the intention of the GPL.

That I agree with. Maybe this will cause the FSF to create a 4th version.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Terminating a support contract, in itself, is not a GPL violation. The restrictions only affects the ability to receive future updates.

Edit: Red Hat indeed claims that no GPL violation is happening, yet they inform their customers that sharing updates leads to contract termination, which clearly breaches the GPL at least in spirit: https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2023/jun/23/rhel-gpl-analysis/

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I think it depends on whether it's considered an additional restriction on the recipient's right to redistribute the software.

Saying, "you can redistribute the software but you will face _____ penalty" seems like a gray area to me.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Context is important. It's possible that the software is distributed without any warning like that and that the termination of the support contract is done without citing the redistribution of previous versions as a reason. OTOH if the customers could prove that there's widespread knowledge of the retaliatory termination that could be equivalent to a (non-written) restriction that is indeed incompatible with the GPL

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The warning is in the agreement every customer (and free developer account) signs to obtain access. They also mention they could sue you, although I think it is unrealistic they would do so just for redistribution.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

Yes more details would be good.

According to Alma Linux

“the way we understand it today, Red Hat’s user interface agreements indicate that re-publishing sources acquired through the customer portal would be a violation of those agreements.”