Some mix of wrong and right, the exact proportions of which I’ll leave as an exercise to the reader.

  • Elw@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I don’t think anyone’s arguing that Red Hat isn’t in the right, legally, to do what they did (anymore). At this point, I think Redhat users are just tired of being jerked around. We’re not children, most of us in the industry have been around a while and have seen this same story play out over and over again. We can see the writing on the wall and they’ve destroyed the trust of their community so, a long winded blog post defending their decision, arguing that they are within their rights to do it is largely irrelevant at this point. They’ve lost the narrative and the industry (us) will respond by gradually finding ways either away from or around Red Hat and associated projects. Soon, the only people left using it will be the same people who use other irrelevant and dated software, government.

    • drspod@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t think anyone’s arguing that Red Hat isn’t in the right, legally, to do what they did (anymore).

      I am. It’s there in the GPL text in black and white. Red Hat does not have any right to place restrictions on the distribution of derivative works that they do not own the original copyright for. Threatening to terminate a service agreement is a restriction.

      All of the projects that own FOSS code that Red Hat uses in RHEL could legitimately revoke Red Hat’s license to use that software on the grounds that they have violated the licensing terms required by the GPL.