Re: early review of RH 9 (Shrike)

[Gordon Messmer <yinyang@xxxxxxxxx>]

Matthew Miller wrote:
> It might be possible with enough money to get a license for any/all GPLed
> software. This would result in a situation like that of QT -- if you want to
> make proprietary software, you'd still have to buy your own license. This is
> maybe improbable now, but as the technology gets older, it could happen.

No, the GPL prohibits such terms.  Unless the software is completely 
free of encumbrances, the GPL is not a suitable license for this software.

In order for software to be distributed under the GPL (not as Free 
Software, but under the GPL specifically), the persons/parties to whom 
you distribute the software must be able to legally distribute the 
software without royalties.

If the software in question were BSD licensed, for instance, then Red 
Hat could at least investigate the possibility of distributing without a 
patent license, or licensing the patents.  However, because the GPL 
places a more strict set of requirements on distribution, it's not even 
an option.




--
Phoebe-list mailing list
Phoebe-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/phoebe-list