• Pantherina@feddit.deOP
    18·
    10 months ago

    Its not really proprietary. Developers get the code, and everyone that gets the binaries also gets the code. Thats GPL compliant.

    • Dehydrated@lemmy.world
      18·
      10 months ago

      To quote Software Freedom Conservancy:

      For approximately twenty years, Red Hat (now a fully owned subsidiary of IBM) has experimented with building a business model for operating system deployment and distribution that looks, feels, and acts like a proprietary one, but nonetheless complies with the GPL and other standard copyleft terms.

      • LeFantome@programming.dev
        7·
        10 months ago

        To quote both of you “nevertheless complies with the GPL and other standard copyleft terms”.

        Were you trying to prove his point?

        • med@sh.itjust.works
          5·
          10 months ago

          As shocking as this might be, I think he’s agreeing, and offering supplimentary proof

        • Dehydrated@lemmy.world
          2·
          10 months ago

          Obviously they comply with the GPL, otherwise they would get sued. But Red Hat acts exactly like a proprietary software company. That’s what the quote is trying to say.