How can proprietary Linuxes charge for anything containing mostly GPL'd components?

[Cuddles McKitten]

Example: iMagic OS

Do they just claim that they're charging for the bits they have written as closed source (even if that code is insignificant relative to the whole)? Plus, isn't there some obligation to provide source for OSS that they use? I couldn't find any links from their page.

[Hwæt]

I was under the impression that the community had found iMagicOS to be a giant violation of the GPL for trying to close source Linux. How have they not yet been closed down?

[Bachstelze]

I was under the impression that the community had found iMagicOS to be a giant violation of the GPL for trying to close source Linux. How have they not yet been closed down?

Truth: most people can ignore the GPL and get away with it. Just look at the FFMpeg "Hall of Shame". How many of those violations led to an actual lawsuit? Zero. Violating the GPL is like downloading music on eMule, you get the cops on you if you're really unlucky, but most people won't ever get anything.

[openuniverse]

.

[forrestcupp]

There aren't any real proprietary Linuxes, just commercial ones. It's not against the GPL to sell GPL'ed software for any price you want.

But usually, they're charging for the right to support or their special way of packaging things.

[Diluted]

I think the GPL only requires you to provide the modified source code to those who use the modified program (see this (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#DoesTheGPLRequireAvailabilityToPublic)). Since they're only providing the OS to those who buy it, I don't think they have to release it to the public. The question is whether they will provide the source code to those who bought the OS and asked for it.