RedHat and software patents

[Simo Sorce]

On Sat, 2002-05-25 at 12:35, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> BTW: Red Hat in general is not very GPL friendly...

I'm not the defender of anyone, but can you explain this statement?
Putting such ana ccusation on a public list without proof is not fair.
I've seen red-hat releasing most (if not all) of his code with the GPL
license so far, so I cannot see why you say they are not-GPL friendly.
So far, in my experience, it seem that red-hat has been one of the most
free software friendly commercial GNU/Linux distribution. I can be wrong
of course.

> Some time ago, I made a proposal to include some (non-read hat) code
> covered by GPL. The answer was: We are not allowed to include code that
> has not been coded by Red Hat employees.

include into what ?
knowing your diplomacy may be you simply got it wrong ... (but that's my
opinion based only on the flames you have made on this list)

regards,
Simo.

-- 
Simo Sorce - simo.sorce at xsec.it
Xsec s.r.l.
via Durando 10 Ed. G - 20158 - Milano
tel. +39 02 2399 7130 - fax: +39 02 700 442 399
-------------- 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://lists.fsfe.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20020525/753a02c0/attachment.sig>