Grsecurity stable patches to be limited to sponsors

Posted Aug 30, 2015 21:59 UTC (Sun) by RCL (guest, #63264)
In reply to: Grsecurity stable patches to be limited to sponsors by pizza
Parent article: Grsecurity stable patches to be limited to sponsors

> Bzzt, wrong. They cancel support contracts if a customer redistributes the *binaries*. You're free to redistribute the source package, and compile the source package and distribute the results. Hence CentOS, Scientific Linux, and so forth.

Even worse...

> But you're not entitled to your own facts. I respectfully suggest you read the FSF's FAQ on the GPL

So what exactly was I wrong about? Revoking support for redistributing binaries violates GPL spirit no less than sources. Or was I wrong about the fact that you cannot sell GPL'd software and not be afraid of your customers re-selling it?

The fundamental problem with GPL is that it was conceived in times when everyone was a developer. In modern world, <1% are professional developers. GPL does not allow to properly reward original developers for their effort, putting them on equal footing with someone who simply repackages their work. That is why Notch is a billionaire while Linus is not.