This is confusing, why post this now even though this is nearly 3 week old news. And why not at least add a summary of all that has happened since in terms of reactions from Rocky, Alma, Oracle, SuSE and the various opinions on how the RHEL license clause restricts GPL freedoms and why use the misleading term 'closed source' that has been widely criticized in the comments to the original article?
this post was submitted on 12 Jul 2023
43 points (95.7% liked)
Privacy Guides
16784 readers
64 users here now
In the digital age, protecting your personal information might seem like an impossible task. We’re here to help.
This is a community for sharing news about privacy, posting information about cool privacy tools and services, and getting advice about your privacy journey.
You can subscribe to this community from any Kbin or Lemmy instance:
Check out our website at privacyguides.org before asking your questions here. We've tried answering the common questions and recommendations there!
Want to get involved? The website is open-source on GitHub, and your help would be appreciated!
This community is the "official" Privacy Guides community on Lemmy, which can be verified here. Other "Privacy Guides" communities on other Lemmy servers are not moderated by this team or associated with the website.
Moderation Rules:
- We prefer posting about open-source software whenever possible.
- This is not the place for self-promotion if you are not listed on privacyguides.org. If you want to be listed, make a suggestion on our forum first.
- No soliciting engagement: Don't ask for upvotes, follows, etc.
- Surveys, Fundraising, and Petitions must be pre-approved by the mod team.
- Be civil, no violence, hate speech. Assume people here are posting in good faith.
- Don't repost topics which have already been covered here.
- News posts must be related to privacy and security, and your post title must match the article headline exactly. Do not editorialize titles, you can post your opinions in the post body or a comment.
- Memes/images/video posts that could be summarized as text explanations should not be posted. Infographics and conference talks from reputable sources are acceptable.
- No help vampires: This is not a tech support subreddit, don't abuse our community's willingness to help. Questions related to privacy, security or privacy/security related software and their configurations are acceptable.
- No misinformation: Extraordinary claims must be matched with evidence.
- Do not post about VPNs or cryptocurrencies which are not listed on privacyguides.org. See Rule 2 for info on adding new recommendations to the website.
- General guides or software lists are not permitted. Original sources and research about specific topics are allowed as long as they are high quality and factual. We are not providing a platform for poorly-vetted, out-of-date or conflicting recommendations.
Additional Resources:
- EFF: Surveillance Self-Defense
- Consumer Reports Security Planner
- Jonah Aragon (YouTube)
- r/Privacy
- Big Ass Data Broker Opt-Out List
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
This has been one of the most overly milked and sensationalised stories I've seen.
The article you linked even explains that this move is in compliance with the GPL.
If people think the GPL's loophole of allowing source to only be distributed to those receiving the binaries and agreeing to non-distribution terms is a problem, then the problem lies with the GPL.
As for if Red Hat is a bad guy here...
OSS needs alternate monetization in the future if things like this would be avoided.
Personally, I'm a big fan of interested parties paying for the production of software (or media, etc) upfront and then the produced thing being available freely.
Should we ever see models move to something like that, then in that ecosystem suddenly closing source is clearly more of a bad guy move.
Here, the article you link straight up has a line about the current model allowing downstream repackaging to deliver effectively the same product without paying Red Hat. It was likely only a matter of time for them to make a move like this.
All that said, I personally would never build a product on top of Red Hat's source for anything moving forward given the potential for further decisions along these lines blowing it up later on. But as someone who was never doing that to begin with, it costs little to commit to.
This is misinformation. RHEL is still open source
RH Closing source code and adding telemetry to Fedora made me go back to Arch. Can't trust these people
RH Closing source code and adding telemetry to Fedora
Neither of those statements are true, it's a shame when people make decisions on bad information.
and what is the community’s response to SuSE’s decision to hard-fork?
Generally, I approve of it. RHEL customers should be able to migrate to SEL fairly easily if they want but there would be some caveats in tooling changes based on kernel version.
Having a hard RHEL fork would make that transition easier for customers that want to leave Red Hat.
The open source drama isn't going to be something most Red Hat contract signers care about, though. So SUSE will have make the transition more appealing in other ways.
view more: next ›