[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: early review of RH 9 (Shrike)

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.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]