[NBLUG/talk] Novell to own SuSE

[E Frank Ball]

On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 10:32:47AM -0800, Dustin Mollo wrote:
} > RedHat Enterprise License terms
} > http://www.redhat.com/licenses/rhel_us_3.html
} > 
} > It isn't pretty.  A couple quotes:
} 
} even more disturbing, imho (comments to follow...):
} 
}    4. REPORTING AND AUDIT. If Customer wishes to increase the number of
}    Installed System, then Customer will purchase from Red Hat additional
}    Services for each additional Installed System. During the term of this
}    Agreement and for one (1) year thereafter, Customer expressly grants to
}    Red Hat the right to audit Customer's facilities and records from time to
}    time in order to verify Customer's compliance with the terms and
}    conditions of this Agreement. Any such audit shall only take place during
}    Customer's normal business hours and upon no less than ten (10) days
}    prior written notice from Red Hat. Red Hat shall conduct no more than one
}    such audit in any twelve-month period except for the express purpose of
}    assuring compliance by Customer where non-compliance has been established
}    in a prior audit. Red Hat shall give Customer written notice of any
}    non-compliance, and if a payment deficiency exists, then Customer shall
}    have fifteen (15) days from the date of such notice to make payment to
}    Red Hat for any payment deficiency. The amount of the payment deficiency
}    will be determined by multiplying the number of underreported Installed
}    Systems or Services by the annual fee for such item. If Customer is found
}    to have underreported the number of Installed Systems or amount of
}    Services by more than five percent (5%), Customer shall, in addition to
}    the annual fee for such item, pay liquidated damages equal to twenty
}    percent (20%) of the underreported fees for loss of income and
}    administration costs suffered by Red Hat as a result.
} 
} what this basically means to me (WARNING: i'm not a lawyer), is that you
} *can't* install the product (RHEL AS/ES/WS 3) on multiple machines.  someone
} posted on slashdot that you *can* install it on multiple machines if you
} decline the support agreement...which means you can not download *any*
} errata updates, with the exception of the SRPMS made available publically on
} their ftp site.


"CUSTOMER MAY USE THE RHN CODE ONLY TO RECEIVE THE RHN
SERVICES FOR SYSTEMS FOR WHICH CUSTOMER HAS PURCHASED A
SUBSCRIPTION FOR RHN SERVICE.  Customer may not use the RHN
Code for any other purpose."

This seems like a violation of the GPL to me.  RHN (RedHat
Network) is theirs, and they can restrict it all they want -
upto a point.  Now they are claiming that if I have GPL
software that I downloaded via RPN that I cannot distribute
this under the GPL license any longer.  They are claiming
that since the GPL soffware passed thru RHN, that the GPL no
longer applies.

http://www.linux.org/info/gnu.html

 2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion of
it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and distribute
such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1 above, provided
that you also meet all of these conditions:

...

    b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in
whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part
thereof, TO BE LICENSED AS A WHOLE AT NO CHARGE TO ALL THIRD PARTIES
under the terms of this License. 

...

These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If
identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and
can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in
themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those
sections when you distribute them as separate works. But when you
distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based on
the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of this
License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the entire
whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who wrote it. Thus,
it is not the intent of this section to claim rights or contest your
rights to work written entirely by you; rather, the intent is to
exercise the right to control the distribution of derivative or
collective works based on the Program. 

In addition, mere aggregation of another work not based on the Program
with the Program (or with a work based on the Program) on a volume of a
storage or distribution medium does not bring the other work under the
scope of this License.

...

4.  YOU MAY NOT copy, modify, SUBLICENSE, or distribute the Program
except as expressly provided under this License.  Any attempt otherwise
to copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the Program is void,

--------------------------------------------------

Redhat seems to think offering the source code meets the GPL
criteria, but that's not the way I read it.

-- 

   E Frank Ball                frankb at efball.com