[lug] Redhat Enterprise Linux

[Michael D. Hirsch]

On Wednesday 20 August 2003 02:09 pm, Jeffrey Siegal wrote:
> Michael D. Hirsch wrote:
> >>I believe the Enterprise versions are subject to one license for every
> >>machine it is installed on.  So you want 10 servers, you pay for 10
> >>licenses.
> >
> > How can they justify this?  They are distributing GPLed code, so why
> > can't I just pay for one and install it on 10 or 100 machines?  I can
> > only ask for support on 1, of course, but is there any legalities
> > keeping me from doing multiple installs?
>
> There are a few theories here:
>
> 1. Red Hat claims a compilation copyright on the distribution as a
> whole.  A compilation is not a derivative work, and the GPL's mere
> aggregation clause applies, so the GPL doesn't necessarily apply to the
> distribution *itself*, just the component packages.  You can pull
> individual packages from RHEL and copy/install them on as many systems
> as you want, but copying too many of them together would violate the
> compilation copyright.

This almost makes sense.  I can copy any single rpm off the disk, but not 
use it to do a fresh install.  That might hold up.

I kinda doubt that RH means that, however.  They've been very good about 
issueing all their code under the GPL.  The only thing I know that they 
haven't released under GPL is thr RH Network update software, but they 
don't distribute it, either.

> 2. GPL does allow you to install it on as many machines as you want, as
> long as you don't want anything from Red Hat beyond what the GPL
> requires them to give you.  No support, no Red Hat Network, etc.  Most
> of the customers Red Hat cares about for RHEL do want these things, and
> then Red Hat can impose additional terms (like "pay us per system") as
> part of those contracts.

I think this one is right.  If you aren't careful (or are careful in just 
the right way), you can make it sound like you aren't allowed to reuse the 
disks, but you really are, as long as you don't want support.

Michael