AlmaLinux No Longer Aims For 1:1 Compatibility With RHEL

[sophisticles]

And interpreted that to mean there is no copyright protection, and the code is in the public domain..

I dont need to tack any insult on to that, it speaks for itself on the quality of your deductive reasoning..

But do keep digging you are quite hillarious.

What's hilarious is that you accused Red Hat of software piracy then provided a link to an article about the Navy using non-licensed software as proof of your claim.

As i said, very "special".

[mSparks]

By definition GPL'd software does not enjoy copyright protection because it is by its very nature in the public domain.

So, you read

Developers that use the GNU GPL protect your rights with two steps: (1) assert copyright on the software, and (2) offer you this License giving you legal permission to copy, distribute and/or modify it.

from the link
you posted earlier.

I have to conclude that you have never read the GPL or do not understand what it says:

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.en.html

And interpreted that to mean there is no copyright protection, and the code is in the public domain..

I dont need to tack any insult on to that, it speaks for itself on the quality of your deductive reasoning..

But do keep digging you are quite hillarious.

[sophisticles]

If that is an attack the messenger not the message addition to the conversation, thanks for confirming my posit.

If you are just commenting on how c001 /\/\y l337 is, thanks, I know.

It's a commentary of how you have no understanding of Copyright Law or Trademark Law in the U.S. yet you are making absurd and silly accusations while posting links to articles that have nothing to do with the issues at hand.

As I have pointed out in similar threads, EULAs are not enforceable under Copyright Law, they are enforceable under Contract Law. In order to have actionable claims under the Copyright Act you must register the original work within 90 days of the date of creation:

https://www.copyright.gov/title17/

https://copyright.gov/what-is-copyright/

The most important step is registering the work. Registering a work is not mandatory, but for U.S. works, registration (or refusal) is necessary to enforce the exclusive rights of copyright through litigation.

https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq-definitions.html

What is copyright infringement?
As a general matter, copyright infringement occurs when a copyrighted work is reproduced, distributed, performed, publicly displayed, or made into a derivative work without the permission of the copyright owner.

Where is the public domain?
The public domain is not a place. A work of authorship is in the “public domain” if it is no longer under copyright protection or if it failed to meet the requirements for copyright protection. Works in the public domain may be used freely without the permission of the former copyright owner.

By definition GPL'd software does not enjoy copyright protection because it is by its very nature in the public domain.

That's why I said you are "special", because you are either trolling, very likely, or you not only do not understand the issues but can't be bothered to educate yourself.

[mSparks]

mSparks, you are a very rare type of "special", aren't you?

If that is an attack the messenger not the message addition to the conversation, thanks for confirming my posit.

If you are just commenting on how c001 /\/\y l337 is, thanks, I know.

[sophisticles]

mSparks, you are a very rare type of "special", aren't you?

[edwaleni]

I did something that supported Alma Linux regardless of their RH decision, I bought one of their tshirts.

[mSparks]

Red Hat are not violating any license by doing this.

They are violating the law, they don't have a licence to violate. Alma Linux are not going to be the only ones to notice this, the vast majority of Redhats customers legal departents will take notice as well.

doesnt completely prevent the likes of

https://www.justice.gov/usao-de/pr/chinese-citizen-pleads-guilty-100-million-internet-software-piracy-conspiracy

who was also "not violating any license"

But it is almost without doubt the end of Redhat.
Anyone using redhat today is liable to end up like

https://apnews.com/general-news-cdc556dd270049eaa67b7ada47b4d111

[novideo]

This is why Redhat are now 100% software pirates. They do not have any active licence from the original authors for their linux distribution, and the only rules that apply is standard copyright law which concludes they go straight to jail, do not pass go.

Red Hat are not violating any license by doing this.

[mSparks]

I have to conclude that you have never read the GPL or do not understand what it says:

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.en.html

I have to conclude you have no idea how copyright law works these days, and that without a licence like the gpl, anyone who is not the original author of the software has absolutely no right to do anything with it, and there are stiff penalties, including hefty fines and jail time, in most every country in the world if you do.

A licence like the gpl only gives you rights you didnt have, it cant take them away or add restrictions, because without a licence like the GPL, anyone who is not 100% the original author has no rights.

This is why Redhat are now 100% software pirates. They do not have any active licence from the original authors for their linux distribution, and the only rules that apply is standard copyright law which concludes they go straight to jail, do not pass go.
No different than a junky selling copied CDs at a flee market, or

https://taskandpurpose.com/news/us-navy-fined-software-privacy/

[sophisticles]

gpl puts absolutely NO restrictions on what you can do with the software.

It manages (very effectively) how much you can infringe on the authors absolute right to exclusive distribution of their work.

I have to conclude that you have never read the GPL or do not understand what it says:

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.en.html