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

Al Foxone akvarius12 at gmail.com
Fri Sep 6 11:50:50 UTC 2013

On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 4:30 AM, Rick Moen <rick at linuxmafia.com> wrote:
> 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

My understanding is that the GPL applies to object code aside from
source-access obligations. Suppose I bought let's say 'install
package' from Red Hat and want to help my neighbour by simply giving
him a copy of that stuff or say a copy of a VM image with RHEL
installed and running so to speak. Note there is absolutely no
confusion that this is really really original Red Hat stuff (not
something made by some other entity) so I don't quite understand why
should I need a trademark license... hope this clarifies what I mean
(suppose also that no Red Hat services will be used by neighbour).

More information about the License-discuss mailing list