Re: Redhat licensing

[Steinar Skjelanger <steinar skjelanger com>]

At 20:47 17.06.2004 -0400, Jay Turner wrote:

> [...] but the
> intent of it is that if a customer has one licensed installation of RHEL,
> then all RHEL installations must be licensed.  By natural extension, if you
> don't have any licensed RHEL installations, then you can run RHEL on
> as many machines as you would like.

Now, THIS is a clear-cut, no-nonsense answer to the question everyone is 
asking. Of course, for those who have followed these Red Hat licensing 
discussions since the dawn of time, this might seem trivial by now. 
However, for someone trying to figure it out for the first time, it's not 
so simple. You have to find and read a rather confusing EULA, and asking 
questions on the mailing lists or directly to Red Hat usually provides 
either nothing or a "get a lawyer" answer.

Living in Norway, I don't really care what a norwegian lawyer thinks about 
this license, and I certainly do not care what an american lawyer thinks 
about it. I'm pretty sure you can get every opinion under the sun, if you 
just ask enough lawyers.

If all you want to know is what Red Hat is trying to do here, and what Red 
Hat thinks about this issue, the above sentence from Jay Turner sums it up 
quite nicely. If someone could put it somewhere where everyone can see it, 
we've probably seen the end of these neverending discussions. Maybe :-)

Thank you, Jay!


Regards,

Steinar Skjelanger