[NTLUG:Discuss] @#$%^&*! redhat up2date!!!!!

[Patrick R. Michaud]

On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 08:51:55AM -0600, Paul Ingendorf wrote:
> 
> I guess the real point would be in were your moral turpitude lies.  Do you
> think it is right to package the work of others and sell it on the basis
> that you are providing a method for that installation and that is all your
> charging for above the cost of the media?  Then turn around and charge
> subscription services for access to the upgraded/patched packages that are
> included in the package you are providing?

I think Justin probably provided a similar answer in his reply, but here's
my take on a shorter version...

On the topic of is it "right to package the work of others and sell it...",
the question really is: has Red Hat added any value by creating their 
packages?

If yes, they have the right to charge for their value-added services, at
whatever rate they feel is appropriate, as long as it is consistent with 
the license agreements of the works they're building upon.  

We as customers have the right to not purchase Red Hat's value-added 
services, or to find other suppliers to provide products and services at 
prices more palatable to us.  If there are no other such providers,
that's our problem, not Red Hat's (since Red Hat could not be considered
a monopoly).

And if one answers "no" to the question above about added value, then 
why go with Red Hat?

Pm
--------------
Patrick R. Michaud, RHCE #808002519807115
Web:   http://www.pmichaud.com
Email: pmichaud at pobox.com