5 ms·

I'm not sure that is accurate about the EULA? The EULA I find googling (this is not something I am previously acquainted with) says: > With the exception of c

I'm not sure that is accurate about the EULA? The EULA I find googling (this is not something I am previously acquainted with) says: > With the exception of certain image files identified in Section 1.3 below, the license terms for the components permit User to copy, modify, and redistribute the component, in both source code and binary code forms. This EULA does not limit User's rights under, or grant User rights that supersede, the license terms of any particular component. — https://www.redhat.com/en/about/licenses/rhds-rhcs-eula https://www.redhat.com/en/about/licenses/rhds-rhcs-eula I may not be interpreting that correctly or what it means practically, I'm not really familiar with what's going on here. If you definitely know better than me, I'm happy to hear it (cites to other informed authors explaining it would be great!), but I don't want to go down a long thread accidentally discussing things based on a misunderstanding of the EULA... I do get that Red Hat is trying to somehow add value to open source software (linux), have it's software be understood as being open source itself (for the marketing value), while also trying to get people to pay to use it. They are trying to have their cake and eat it too, I get it. And maybe they have enough lawyers to make it work somehow, or can just make it so inconvenient practically to use the rights the open source license grants to make it work somehow. But yeah, if you "don't want to give your main product away for free", and your "main product" is licensed with an open source license... you are in a pretty difficult spot. Which is, I guess, where Red Hat finds themselves.

arp242 3y ago
I've seen it mentioned in a few places; it took me a bit to find it, but it's in the "subscription services agreement"[1], the relevant bit being section 2.2: "Distributing the Subscription Services (or any portion) to a third party outside the Portal or using the Subscription Services to support a third party without paying the respective fees is a material breach of this Agreement even though the open source license applicable to individual software packages may give you the right to distribute those packages (and this Agreement is not intended to interfere with your rights under those individual licenses)." I think the way this works (legally) is that accessing their service (their Customer Portal) is covered under this EULA, while the software is covered under the license. So technically you're not adding additional restrictions to the GPL. Or something like that. Not a lawyer etc. etc. Edit: I see there's also some discussion of this over here, in case you're interested: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36436375 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36436375 [1]: https://www.redhat.com/rhdc/managed-files/GLOBAL_Cloud_Subscription_Services_Agreement_English_20171117.pdf https://www.redhat.com/rhdc/managed-files/GLOBAL_Cloud_Subsc...
- jrochkind1 3y ago
  Makes sense -- it sounds like you can't let someone else use your credentials to access the Customer Portal website/online services... or maybe there's something else that's a "subscription service" they're trying to limit too that I don't understand... but they seem to acknowledge you still have the right to redistribute the source code of any GPL licensed code, that the GPL gives you, right? But yeah, they are trying to figure out how to square the circle and have their cake and eat it too. It does not seem like they are actually trying to tell you that you have lost the legal right to redistribute GPL software though.

arp242 3y ago

I've seen it mentioned in a few places; it took me a bit to find it, but it's in the "subscription services agreement"[1], the relevant bit being section 2.2: "Distributing the Subscription Services (or any portion) to a third party outside the Portal or using the Subscription Services to support a third party without paying the respective fees is a material breach of this Agreement even though the open source license applicable to individual software packages may give you the right to distribute those packages (and this Agreement is not intended to interfere with your rights under those individual licenses)." I think the way this works (legally) is that accessing their service (their Customer Portal) is covered under this EULA, while the software is covered under the license. So technically you're not adding additional restrictions to the GPL. Or something like that. Not a lawyer etc. etc. Edit: I see there's also some discussion of this over here, in case you're interested: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36436375 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36436375 [1]: https://www.redhat.com/rhdc/managed-files/GLOBAL_Cloud_Subscription_Services_Agreement_English_20171117.pdf https://www.redhat.com/rhdc/managed-files/GLOBAL_Cloud_Subsc...

jrochkind1 3y ago
Makes sense -- it sounds like you can't let someone else use your credentials to access the Customer Portal website/online services... or maybe there's something else that's a "subscription service" they're trying to limit too that I don't understand... but they seem to acknowledge you still have the right to redistribute the source code of any GPL licensed code, that the GPL gives you, right? But yeah, they are trying to figure out how to square the circle and have their cake and eat it too. It does not seem like they are actually trying to tell you that you have lost the legal right to redistribute GPL software though.