• fortified_banana@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think they’ll still be compliant as long as they offer their source to customers. The GPL doesn’t require that you make source available to anyone, but to anyone that you distribute binaries to. From the GNU website:

    One of the fundamental requirements of the GPL is that when you distribute object code to users, you must also provide them with a way to get the source.

    Source: Quick GPLv3 Guide under the More Ways for Developers to Provide Source section.

    Of course the GPL also allows redistribution of source code, and Red Hat seems to want to threaten customers who do so.

    • Jeena@jemmy.jeena.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, preventing your users from redistribution this is where they might get into trouble and the GPL license would be retracted and thus they would have pirated the software. But someone would need to prove it in court and IBM has a couple of good lawyers.

    • Naatan@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Maybe I’m missing something; I thought the issue here was that they “aren’t” making their source code available. Just modifications to the original code that can be supplied back to the original source. That doesn’t cover all derivative work though.

      • cliffhanger407
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not quite–all developer accounts for RHEL will have access to source. They’re just trying to restrict redistribution of said source by downstreams.