*nix distro companies defying GPL?

[falcone]

I don't know if its just me, or are the linux companies going against GPL? I just noticed recently that compaines like mandrakesoft and red hat are releasing their paid software first, and then the free-for-download versions months later... in fact, i can't even find the new redhat distros for download! I tot you had to release GPL software for free even if you modify it?

Just some thoughts lol

 

[NetRyder]

Use Slackware. It's better anyway.
I agree though. RedHat, Mandrake and many other "major" distros seem to have become a bit too commercialized lately. You can still find free downloads of all these distros though. Check out http://www.linuxiso.org

 

[j79zlr]

as far as I'm concerned, I think they will kill themselves trying to do it that way. And I am fine with it. RH and Mandrake run so slow anyway, I'll stick with slackware. It is one of the oldest lasting distros and that is for a reason.

I still am not sure why anyone would use linux for a server when a nice friendly daemon handles the job much better

 

[Xie]

hasn't RH dropped support for the "free" version?

 

[j79zlr]

they have dropped support for RH9 but I think Fedora is supported. Who needs support? http://www.google.com/linux

 

[NetRyder]

I agree. If Google doesn't help you, there are plenty of forums with knowledgable people who are always willing to help.

 

[vern]

The GNU license does not mean you can't sell software. Linux companies have to make money somewhere. I'm actually glad Mandrakesoft is starting to make money and Redhat is targetting the corporate market.

 

[falcone]

yea i agree wif u vern.. actually all of you lol.. was just wondering aloud i tink i will get slackware up and running one of these days and see how it goes.. if NetRyder said it, i have to try it

 

[sean.ferguson]

slackware owns them all anyway

 

[Reg]

Actually, I don't believe people like Mandrake are violating the GPL. The reason is because there is no difference between paying for Mandrake and downloading it. Both versions include the exact same thing. The only difference, in this case, is that Mandrake provides the latest version of their software to Mandrake Club customers first and then to the rest of the world second. Since they are not forcing you to buy Mandrake, rather they are just making you wait an additional 30 days to get it for free. BTW, if you are looking for the free version of Mandrake Soft, check out http://www.linuxiso.org or http://www.linux-mandrake.com (linux-mandrake is the official download URL for their software. I don't see it published anywhere on mandrake.com though).

Now, if you want to talk about linux distro's who I feel ARE violating GPL, take a stroll over to the infamous Lindows.com, in which the only way to get it is with cash money.

 

[falcone]

oh yea.. that is one.. the distro is good though, i heard... oh my, what ever happened to open source and the free market?

 

[Reg]

Personally, I can't stand Lindows. Users run at the root level so essentially it has the potential to be just as big of a problem as Windows is. I would recommend Lycoris for a desktop replacement. But, even Lycoris is on the edge of a GPL violation (not publicly offering download... available from Linuxiso.org).

 

[j79zlr]

The GPL does not prevent you from selling software, specifically. But once it is sold once, the purchaser of the code has the legal right to freely modify and distribute the source code, so it kinda defeats the purpose.

 

[falcone]

oh... so if i purchase the software I can say.. add a comment tag somewhere and re-release for free? kinda cool

 

[NetRyder]

// No comment

 

[vern]

It's 2:20am, can't sleep, and ran across this article. It might clarify some myths about free software, GNU/GPL, etc.

http://www.thejemreport.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=113

 

[X-Istence]

Lindows.com is not violating GPL.

They can sell their addition in conjunctions with the base system. You can buy their stuff and the GPL'ed base system, and you can only edit the base system. Not their stuff as it is under a different license.

Anyways, none of am are in violation. They understand the GPL very well. If you want to know who violates the GPL, check out http://sco.com/ who has recently sued IBM for some crap, read up on http://slashdot.org/ or http://groklaw.net/ for further mentions of the IBM/SCO lawsuit.

 

[falcone]

lol that case is a classic man... they really got the balls to like, go against the entier *nix community? surprised no one has counter-sued them or something hmm...

on the lindows.com thingy, then aren't they supposed to release their base system? juz some thoughts...

 

[vern]

Another interesting read ...

http://lwn.net/Articles/75286/

 

[ignipotentis]

I haven't read all the posts, but NO, they are not violateing the GPL. There is nothing in the GPL which states that they have to make an easily installable ISO availible to you. The packages they use all have the source code availible.

Hope that clears this up for you.