[CLUE-Tech] GPL loopholes

[Angelo Bertolli]

> Red Hat cannot restrict your rights to GPL'ed code, but they do not have
> to allow you to use their name to distribute a product. The two issues
> are quite separate -- and, in fact, Red Hat HAS to police the usage of
> their trademark, or it can be "diluted" and they will lose the ability
> to enforce it. 

What about when they have "Red Hat" embedded into some of their GPL
software?  Doesn't this nullify or make it more difficult to defend the
trademark?

I don't think you should assume that all I want is a free ride.  The 
spirit of GPL and Linux has always been sharing.  The fact that Red Hat 
does share their source code could be even stronger grounds for 
participating in sharing.  I mean after all, how much of Libranet uses 
Red Hat's code?  Maybe none.  But either way, distros use code which 
they didn't write.  From just a moral standpoint, if I used code that I
didn't write, I'd certainly at least give ANOTHER site my source code to 
allow downloads.  You say "it costs them money to provide downloads" but 
there are plenty of sites out there that are willing to provide space 
for your code for free!  So even though legally it may be more sound to 
say "at a reasonable price" the reality is people can often distribute 
GPL code at no cost to themselves.  (e.g. Libranet can provide 
linuxiso.org with images and not have to pay for the bandwidth it takes 
for you to download them)

I guess I just don't like to see people out there being "stingy" with 
their code when in order to write their software they had to use someone 
elses.  But most of all, my point is I don't want this software for 
myself, I  just like to see people share code which they have borrowed 
from others in the first place.  So please, don't say I'm just looking 
for a free ride.


Angelo