> "extend" it in a way that they don't release the source
Linux, thankfully, is GPL rather than MIT. Microsoft trying to defy Linux's license would result in the easiest lawsuit ever won by the EFF.
Linux, thankfully, is GPL rather than MIT. Microsoft trying to defy Linux's license would result in the easiest lawsuit ever won by the EFF.
Just because you're annoyed they put some roadblocks for freeloaders, doesn't mean you get to distort facts.
What Red Hat is doing doesn't damage open-source. Open-source is meant to guarantee the end-user (ideally a normal person, not a tech giant, at least for me that's the only person I care about) has the freedom to use/modify the software they paid for. Everyone can still do that.
What's gone is the abuse of the GPL for systematic, automated cloning by parasites like Oracle or Cloud Linux Foundation, simply for the purpose of using RHEL without paying for it.
If you need RHEL on your systems, use one of the 16 free RHEL licenses they give you. If your app runs in a Docker container, the RHEL images require no license to use. If this isn't enough, switch distros (I hear CentOS Stream is pretty close) or pay for RHEL.
I simply don't see legitimate users being affected by this.