4 ms·

It's correct that the GPL does not require RH to distribute the source code to anyone but their customers. That's not the issue though! The issue is that if I,

It's correct that the GPL does not require RH to distribute the source code to anyone but their customers. That's not the issue though! The issue is that if I, as a RH customer, execute the rights given to me by RH via the GPL and pass the sources to a third party, RH will terminate my customer contract. The license does not proscribe this in letter but it seems to go against its spirit.

kazinator 3y ago
Although RH terminates the contract, they cannot stop you from using and redistributing what you got out of them, or even creating your own fork of RH. They don't want to pay their engineers to work on Red Hat only to have some free forks follow the work, so they came up with the idea of eliminating and likely blacklisting customers who look like are there just to pick up changes for a fork. Red Hat should be applauded for trying to find a business model which is compatible with copyleft, yet prevents freeloading. Stallman never wanted to create a license that was anti-business, that's why this kind of thing is possible. A license which says you cannot drop or blacklist customers for any reason wouldn't be a free license. There is an abundance of distros out there; anyone who doesn't like Red Hat for any reason can easily use something else. It will be interesting to see whether Red Hat's ploy works out in the long run. Will it help grow their business, or will it turn out to be detrimental due to a backlash effect. Obviously, some people don't like it; it's a question of are there enough of them to matter. There is also the question of whether a free fork of Red Hat that people can develop and test with without becoming paying Red Hat customers really is bad for Red Hat (as they are obviously convinced) or whether it is actually good.
- _ea1k 3y ago
  Copylefts like the GPL don't have a "no freeloaders" restriction. I believe that was intentional, as most users will be freeloaders by definition.
- op00to 3y ago
  The idea that someone can compel a company to keep doing business with them after the vendor decided they don’t want to anymore and hold no contractual obligation to continue doing business with the customer is hilarious. This is the equivalent of people getting the Car Dealer Chatbot to sell them a Tesla for $1.
- anticensor 3y ago
  > you cannot drop or blacklist customers for any reason Trade law in Europe works like exactly that: you do not get to choose your clients; you either have to serve anyone that is willing to pay, or no one at all. The US should definitely adopt this principle.
  - nradov 3y ago
    Are there any limits to that principle? What if a particular customer openly advocates for, let's say, the destruction of the state of Israel? Should a business be required to serve that customer?
  - kazinator 3y ago
    > The US should definitely adopt this principle. It does, in some ways? Your business can't discriminate based on protected characteristics, like race.
  - kazinator 3y ago
    If literally true as you have written it up, it's pretty stupid; e.g. a brick-and-mortar store should be able to ban someone who shoplifts, or harasses staff or customers.
    - josephcsible 3y ago
      > a brick-and-mortar store should be able to ban someone who shoplifts I don't even like this. Shoplifters should all go to prison, but once they've paid their debt to society and been rehabilitated, they should be allowed to do everything that law-abiding citizens can do, including going back as a legitimate customer to stores that they previously stole from.
      - iraqmtpizza 3y ago
        law-abiding citizens can get banned from WalMart too
  - pjmlp 3y ago
    On the contrary, plenty of business in European countries have "We reserve the right of admission" shown quite visible. Many customers aren't wanted, even if they happen to have money to spend.
marcosdumay 3y ago
> The license does not proscribe this in letter I do really disagree on this. If somebody tells you "you are allowed to do X", not punishing you when you do X is clearly stated.
nradov 3y ago
Fortunately, there are plenty of alternatives to Red Hat. They don't have much in the way of really unique IP. Many successful companies run Linux without a single Red Hat license.

kazinator 3y ago

Although RH terminates the contract, they cannot stop you from using and redistributing what you got out of them, or even creating your own fork of RH. They don't want to pay their engineers to work on Red Hat only to have some free forks follow the work, so they came up with the idea of eliminating and likely blacklisting customers who look like are there just to pick up changes for a fork. Red Hat should be applauded for trying to find a business model which is compatible with copyleft, yet prevents freeloading. Stallman never wanted to create a license that was anti-business, that's why this kind of thing is possible. A license which says you cannot drop or blacklist customers for any reason wouldn't be a free license. There is an abundance of distros out there; anyone who doesn't like Red Hat for any reason can easily use something else. It will be interesting to see whether Red Hat's ploy works out in the long run. Will it help grow their business, or will it turn out to be detrimental due to a backlash effect. Obviously, some people don't like it; it's a question of are there enough of them to matter. There is also the question of whether a free fork of Red Hat that people can develop and test with without becoming paying Red Hat customers really is bad for Red Hat (as they are obviously convinced) or whether it is actually good.

_ea1k 3y ago
Copylefts like the GPL don't have a "no freeloaders" restriction. I believe that was intentional, as most users will be freeloaders by definition.
op00to 3y ago
The idea that someone can compel a company to keep doing business with them after the vendor decided they don’t want to anymore and hold no contractual obligation to continue doing business with the customer is hilarious. This is the equivalent of people getting the Car Dealer Chatbot to sell them a Tesla for $1.
anticensor 3y ago
> you cannot drop or blacklist customers for any reason Trade law in Europe works like exactly that: you do not get to choose your clients; you either have to serve anyone that is willing to pay, or no one at all. The US should definitely adopt this principle.
- nradov 3y ago
  Are there any limits to that principle? What if a particular customer openly advocates for, let's say, the destruction of the state of Israel? Should a business be required to serve that customer?
- kazinator 3y ago
  > The US should definitely adopt this principle. It does, in some ways? Your business can't discriminate based on protected characteristics, like race.
- kazinator 3y ago
  If literally true as you have written it up, it's pretty stupid; e.g. a brick-and-mortar store should be able to ban someone who shoplifts, or harasses staff or customers.
  - josephcsible 3y ago
    > a brick-and-mortar store should be able to ban someone who shoplifts I don't even like this. Shoplifters should all go to prison, but once they've paid their debt to society and been rehabilitated, they should be allowed to do everything that law-abiding citizens can do, including going back as a legitimate customer to stores that they previously stole from.
    - iraqmtpizza 3y ago
      law-abiding citizens can get banned from WalMart too
- pjmlp 3y ago
  On the contrary, plenty of business in European countries have "We reserve the right of admission" shown quite visible. Many customers aren't wanted, even if they happen to have money to spend.

marcosdumay 3y ago

> The license does not proscribe this in letter I do really disagree on this. If somebody tells you "you are allowed to do X", not punishing you when you do X is clearly stated.

nradov 3y ago

Fortunately, there are plenty of alternatives to Red Hat. They don't have much in the way of really unique IP. Many successful companies run Linux without a single Red Hat license.