@
Jirajine 这个链接里的评论应该完全解释了这个问题，为什么 红帽似乎能对 gpl 规定的权益做出限制。
https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/14gfvuz/rhel_locks_sources_releases_behind_customer_portal/No. Here user ubernostrum from
lobte.rs explains better than me:
What we’re really talking about is a situation where two legal documents are involved, but they are separate from and orthogonal to each other:
1 - The GPL, which governs your rights to software you have already received.
2 - A contract with the vendor, which governs whether and under what conditions they will provide new versions, bugfixes, and other support on an ongoing basis in the future.
What document (2) does is actually give you more rights than the base GPL would – after all, the GPL does not impose any obligation on a distributor to continue distributing future versions, or to fix bugs (in fact, the GPL explicitly disclaims any warranty), etc.
And document (2) can condition those additional rights on anything it wants. It can take those additional rights away if you stop paying an agreed-on fee. It can take those additional rights away, and bonk you with the Calvinball, if you don’t cover your eyes when you’re in the Invisible Zone. And, yes, it can take those additional rights away if you use or distribute the software in a manner not permitted by the support contract.
You still have all the rights the GPL grants you, for the software you already received. You can run the software for any purpose. You can modify it. You can redistribute it, in modified or unmodified form. Even if you breach the terms of the support contract you retain those rights. You just lose the additional rights the support contract was providing, and that is perfectly compatible with the GPL, because the GPL only prevents people from taking away rights it grants, not from conditionally granting additional rights on top.
And that is basically how “enterprise support” contracts for GPL’d software work, and always have.
https://lobste.rs/s/a0mucw/red_hat_cutting_back_rhel_source#c_q41ht9
3
Select Language