ok i have a question aobut the GNU, license

say i obtained a copy of redhat linux by downloading it from

the site, and i decide to re-destribute it by charging a feee

for the meduim and another fee for myself (i dont provide

warranty) for example if the medium costs me 5$, if i

re-destribute the final redhat copy at a price of 10$ would i

be violating the GNU public license, and in effect pirating

linux?

"1. You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty; keep intact all the notices that refer to this License and to the absence of any warranty; and give any other recipients of the Program a copy of this License along with the Program.

You may charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy, and you may at your option offer warranty protection in exchange for a fee. "

That's what's nice about open source.

Now if you tried that with windows and got caught, you'd be surounded by FBI agents with rocket launchers and fuel rod guns.

hahah fuel rod guns, swooping in on banshees...

I just thought of something, I wonder of cartona is open source. O_o I would not mind that...

hi, i know its been a while but..

im still not convinced.. all though the GPL license says..

"You may charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy, and you may at your option offer warranty protection in exchange for a fee. "

the FAQ says that i may charge 'any' fee for re-selling the product.. what is this contradiction..

That isn't a contradiction.

It is not a contradiction in any ways... Open source and free software... are mixed up too much.. the free in free software means "FREE AS IN FREEDOM"... this is what generally people confuse themselves... and get into contradictions from misinterpretations....
it would be much more clear to you if you read The Cathedral and The BAZAAR by Eric S. Raymond... it will give you a better idea...

just make sure that all the code is indeed GPL - if there's even one line of code on there with a licence which does not allow you to redistribute and charge for it, then you could be in trouble.

Any fee for distributing a copy would be exactly the same as "You may charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy". The physical act of transfering a copy is just a long way of saying distributing a copy. You can charge whatever you want for that, but understand that most people using linux these days realize they can get it without paying your fees and will just go through other, free, distribution channels.

As far as I know nieghter Redhat nor any other major distro use code that is not under a "GPL Compatible" license. What I mean by this, is while not all the code may be GPL'd, it is all under a license that has the same distribution restraints as the GPL (the same or less restrictive anyway). The one exception is the XFree license for XFree 4.4.

You may charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy, and you may at your option offer warranty protection in exchange for a fee. "

so u are telling me the above phrase can be re-phrased as: "You may re-destribute the software for 'any' price you like"

so if that was the case.. then why the clause :
'and you may at your option offer warranty protection in exchange for a fee'

since you can get any amount you want anyway with or without warrenty.

thanks

you cant charge for the software but you can charge what ever you like for the media (CD) and the time it took you to download and burn it. plus you may charge an additional free (warranty) that the CD is in working order (not scratched and burned incorrectly).

Details Dept: please consider using a term other than "pirate", unless of course you are physically boarding ships upon the high seas under hostile circumstances and plundering their cargo. Distributing Linux, with or without a fee, is permitted, as long as it conforms to the terms set forth in the GPL. -- J.W.

Not every application included with every distribution is licensed under GPL...these applications may have different redistribution allowances, so I'd not be so quick to say it's okay.

mikshaw... can you please give me some examples of such licenses and .. and name a few examples of such ditributions along with some programs which is not exacly.. GPL.. and create complications with such 'copying' ?

and gbarny

"you cant charge for the software but you can charge what ever you like for the media (CD) and the time it took you to download and burn it. plus you may charge an additional free (warranty) that the CD is in working order (not scratched and burned incorrectly). "

but if somebody is giving away enterprise versions of redhat without warranty and charges more than cost of re-distributing (thus getting a profit) is it illiegal?