AlmaLinux's response to Red Hat's policy change

Posted Jul 12, 2023 15:02 UTC (Wed) by pizza (subscriber, #46)
In reply to: AlmaLinux's response to Red Hat's policy change by madscientist
Parent article: AlmaLinux's response to Red Hat's policy change

> In every way, the exact point of the GPL is exactly to ensure that "someone else" can get the benefit of the source code. That's the ENTIRE REASON the license exists. If you don't agree with that you should not be distributing GPL'd software.

No, the point isn't to ensure that "someone else" gets the benefit of the source code.

The point is to ensure that *the recipient of the software* gets the (full) benefit of the source code.

Nothing in the GPL *forces* the recipient to redistribute it, much less to random third parties. It only says that *IF* they choose to redistribute it, they also pass along the source code (via one of several enumerated methods), with no (additional) restrictions beyond what the GPL allows.

And the GPL does allow for some restrictions; eg with respect to trademark/branding, and crucially to this kerfuffle, support -- The GPL makes it quite clear that support/service/updates lie outside the scope of the GPL, and explicitly states that the mere act of supplying sources is sufficient reason to terminate any support/service agreements, and stop providing further updates.