3 ms·

There's some controversy on that: https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2023/jun/23/rhel-gpl-analysis/ https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2023/jun/23/rhel-gpl-analysis...

• pjmlp 3y ago
  "Now, to be clear, the GPL agreements did not obligate Red Hat to make its CCS publicly available to everyone. This is a common misconception about GPL's requirements"
  • Qem 3y ago
    On further reading: "Due to this ongoing bad behavior by IBM's Red Hat, the situation has become increasingly complex and difficult to face. No third party can effectively monitor RHEL compliance with the GPL agreements, since customers live in fear of losing their much-needed service contracts. Red Hat's legal department has systematically refused SFC's requests in recent years to set up some form of monitoring by SFC. (For example, we asked to review the training materials and documents that RHEL salespeople are given to convince customers to buy RHEL, and Red Hat has not been willing to share these materials with us.) Nevertheless, since SFC serves as the global watchdog for GPL compliance, we welcome reports of RHEL-related violations." TL;DR: To be sure they were complying, marketing department is as important as the legal one, and they were fearful of people taking a good look there.