[NTLUG:Discuss] redhat AS license?

[Patrick R. Michaud]

On Thu, Mar 04, 2004 at 01:57:30PM +0000, m m wrote:
> > This agreement does not permit Customer to distribute the Software
> > using Red Hat's trademarks.
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> in summary, GPL "says" under GPL license, people are free use it and free 
> to redistribute it along with the license.
> Isn't it conflict with GPL?
> 
> Let me make a example. if Mr.RedHead make a software, the whole package 
> include some 3rd softwares which under GPL license, and part of the 
> software developed by Mr.RedHead, can he claim his software as GPL AND NOT 
> allows people redistribute the his software?

No, Red Hat is not conflicting with the GPL.  The GPL is fairly specific
that it is used to licenes software (in the sense of programs/executables) 
and not necessarily the media used to distribute such software.  So, 
although a Red Hat CD may contain many GPL programs, the Red Hat
CD is also allowed to contain things that are not covered by the GPL 
as long as those other things aren't combined with the GPL-programs to
form a "single program" (such as the Red Hat trademark).  Thus, although a
Red Hat CD may contain GPL software, that does not automatically mean 
the entire contents of the CD are under the GPL.

In this case Red Hat says that you may redistribute the software
components of their CD under the licenses for each component (some of which
are GPL and others are non-GPL), but you cannot distribute those packages
under Red Hat's trade mark.  They aren't restricting your license to
redistribute the GPL software on the CD, they're just making it harder to
do so, by saying that you have to first get rid of everything on the
CD that you aren't licensed to redistribute.  This is completely within
the scope of the GPL, and if you don't like it, you're free to create your
own GNU/Linux distribution from the parts of the Red Hat (and other)
CDs that you do have license rights to.  

Just don't call the result 'Red Hat', or have any Red Hat specific items
on the CDs you create.

> if it is 
> true, the RedHat logo in the software is a 'piece of code'. if RH calim 
> their product under GPL. then poeple (NTLUG) should be able sale it under 
> GPL.

Without getting into the argument of whether or not an image qualifies
as a 'piece of code'... Red Hat has never claimed their products or logos
to be "under the GPL".  Their products contain GPL'ed components, but
the product itself isn't GPL.

disclaimer: #include "std_ianal.h"

Pm