[ILUG-BOM] GPL related clarification sought
Tue May 10 20:27:21 IST 2005
>--- sherlock at vsnl.com wrote:
> I am absolutely sure of the above. However IANAL. So take a legal opinion
> from two lawyers together a copyright expert and a contract expert if you
> plan on tangling legally with RH or Suse or whoever. If you are planning
> a bussiness by placing restrictions on the recipient, perish the thought.
> Final word. If the original code is gpld, you can copy and distribute the
> code and the binary to your hearts content - contract or no contract.
Thank you. great insights.
a) As far as placing restrictions on the recipients.. Well, not that I would, but
if I could, wouldnt that be so cool?
b) Not planning to tangle with Suse or RH, but am wondering, whether I need to
"buy" 40 licences or subscriptions to RHEL or SuSe when I could buy 1 and load on
all. How would it affect my working. Would I be breaking the law in any form and
can anyone kick my butt for it.
Since an "activation" is required, would i be able to start it at all?
Not that RHI has shown any interest in making me a paid customer despite a couple
of requests. I guess business must already be super for them which in turn means
Open Source is already quite happening on a commercial scale. go RH.
Yahoo! Mail Mobile
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.
More information about the Linuxers