> Actually, it wouldn't surprise me if IBM put some content in the RHEL repo that is under restrictive licenses that couldn't be redistributed just to complicat

> Actually, it wouldn't surprise me if IBM put some content in the RHEL repo that is under restrictive licenses that couldn't be redistributed just to complicate things, but all the important parts will remain open source, due to close ties to CentOS Stream and Fedora. I'm not so sure. They're obligated to release the GPL'd code, which of course covers Linux itself, but they're under no such obligation for the non-GPL'd software they include. They could license their RHEL-specific backport patches for non-GPL'd software such that they could not be redistributed, and if that code gets merged into CentOS Stream it could just be dual licensed from that port forward (so Stream could stay open but RHEL would be locked down).