Re: Plea for a reasonable RHASv3 license option

[email protected]
Newsgroups gmane.linux.redhat.taroon
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Mon, 1 Sep 2003, Stephen Smoogen wrote:

> I have the feeling that if the FSF were to say publically that it was ok 
> it wouldnt do anything other than make PHOFB[1] say that the FSF were 
> hipocrites or had been bought out by Red Hat. 
> 
> [1] People hooked on Free Beer.


I personally have no problem paying for services. In fact I paid RedHat 
between 15l the last two years.  I paid them for support 
and RHN on RedHat 7.3, later converting to RedHat AS 2.1.  I had no 
problem paying them these fees because I was buying something of value, at 
some point RedHat called me up and said RedHat 7.3 will no longer be 
supported and I would need to move to RedHat AS. 

I said, sure thing. I understand that you can't support multiple builds so 
I signed up.  Had I known I lost a freedom that day, I may have made a 
different choice.  

There is more at stake here than "Free beer".  The vast majority of the 
software on my RedHat AS disks were already paid for by developer 
motives, whether that be the love of code, or the love of a company/client 
pay checks.  

By being forced to hold a "valid lease" for each copy of this code, we are 
affectively re-paying for what is already been purchased by the open/free 
software communities.  

In my opinion regardless of FSF's position on this matter, it is still a 
question position for RedHat to take.  This will be my last post in this 
thread, hopefull we all can get back to testing the upcoming RedHat AS 3.0 
software.

Shane.


--
Taroon-beta-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/taroon-beta-list
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.