[TriLUG] Re: gentle reminder

[Ed Hill]

On Wed, 2002-08-28 at 13:27, Roberto J Dohnert wrote:

[*snip*]

> The threat was worded like this " If you continue to preload Red
> Hat Linux without being a registered OEM we will sue you and it doesnt
> matter if you buy a retail version or not we will not offer any support for
> anybody who buys a computer preloaded with Red Hat Linux from any reseller
> who is not an OEM. wether it is a supported Retail version or not." But my
> concern is that these people put the faith in me and my systems on my word
> alone.  

[*snip*]

> > BTW - I'd like to hear more about the legal threat Red Hat gave you WRT
> > preloading their distro on machines.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but
> > doesn't the GPL prevent them from doing any such thing?


Hi ThunderBear and Roberto,

Ok, now we're getting to the heart of the matter.  The GPL says
absolutely *NOTHING* about support.  The word doesn't even appear in the
license document.  And don't take my word for it.  Instead, please go
(re-)read it at:

  http://www.fsf.org/licenses/licenses.html


Under such licensing terms, Red Hat and other companies are able to
offer support contracts for the GPL'ed and similarly licensed software
under *any* terms that they desire so long as their terms do not
infringe upon the basic licenses for the distributed packages.  Try to
understand the distinction.  Support is a service offered under one or
more contracts and is thus separate from the physical software
distribution.

That said, I think Red Hat is totally justified in their efforts to
license and control OEM installs.  As we all know, installing Linux is
not always easy due to hardware issues (eg. sound cards).  Support calls
cost Red Hat money and they certainly don't want to get flooded with
complaints from buyers of machines that have been poorly installed or
poorly configured by shoddy or clueless resellers.  Its just common
sense.  Remember, Red Hat is mostly in the business of selling their
"brand" and support.  They have a clear responsibility to their
shareholders to protect and nurture their brand.

So what can a small reseller do about this situation?  Here are, AFAIK,
four legitimate approaches:

  1) Follow Red Hat's OEM terms.  Get the training, pay the fees, 
     and work with them under their terms.  Remember, its *their* 
     name that you are, in part, selling and they own the trade-
     mark so they get some control over its use.

  2) Be an OEM for a different distribution if you don't like Red 
     Hat's terms.

  3) Create your own distro.  In fact, you can copy and use every 
     last *bit* of the Free and Open Source packages within Red 
     Hat's distribution (which is nearly *ALL* of it) so long as 
     you don't use Red Hat's name in your advertising or sales 
     documents.  Go ahead and call your new distribution "Pink 
     Hat Linux" and loudly proclaim "100% compatibility with 
     leading Linux distributions" in your advertisements.  You 
     could then sell your own support for your own OS.  This 
     is totally legal and is being done by numerous consultants 
     including the good folks (http://www.tummy.com) who make 
     and sell KRUD.

  4) Become a boxed-OS reseller.  Follow whatever terms are 
     necessary to re-sell end-user copies of Red Hat.  At the 
     same time, sell computers with no OS installed. If the 
     consumer buys the computer and OS and loads the OS by 
     themselves then they are covered under Red Hat's support 
     terms.

Roberto, #3 and #4 both sound like good approaches for companies who
are, as you have described, trying to do it "on-the-cheap".

And I'm sure there are other legal approaches to this issue.  But they
don't include silly tactics like pre-installing end-user copies of Red
Hat as an end-run around the OEM/support terms.  Such gimmicks belie a
fundamental mis-understanding of the support contracts and are clearly
unprofessional and, depending on the support contract terms, probably
illegal.

Ed

ps - I'm not a lawyer.  I cannot offer legal advice.

pps - I have not closely read the support or OEM terms for 
      Red Hat Linux.  Have you?


-- 
Edward H. Hill III, PhD 
Post-Doctoral Researcher   |  Email:  ed at eh3.com,  ehill at mines.edu
Division of ESE            |  URLs:   http://www.eh3.com
Colorado School of Mines   |    http://cesep.mines.edu/people/edhill.php
Golden, CO  80401          |  Phone:  303-273-3483    Fax: 303-273-3311
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://www.trilug.org/pipermail/trilug/attachments/20020828/12b0c4bb/attachment.pgp>