[License-discuss] Red Hat compilation copyright & RHEL contract (was Re: License incompatibility)

Rick Moen rick at linuxmafia.com
Wed Sep 4 02:30:01 UTC 2013

Quoting Al Foxone (akvarius12 at gmail.com):

> Red Hat customers receive RHEL compilation as a whole in ready for use
> binary form but Red Hat claims that it can not be redistributed in
> that original form due to trademarks (without additional trademark
> license, says Red Hat) and under pay-per-use-unit restrictive
> contract. I would not call that GPL.

You're entitled to be mistaken.
Last I checked, all source-access obligations under GPLv3, GPLv2, and
other applicable copyleft licences were being fully complied with here:

The choice of licence for the asserted compilation copyright is indeed a
little weird, but it's rather unlikely to be adjudicated.  Contract and
trademark are a different matter.

My recollection is that Red Hat, Inc. assert trademark encumbrances
concerning two non-software SRPMs containing artwork, etc.  Those two
are not asserted to be GPL, so it doesn't matter what you 'call it', I

More information about the License-discuss mailing list