I'm talking about threatening to revoke access to the support program, which is the only way to get RHEL source, as a way to prevent redistribution of GPL'd sourcecode. That's a violation of Section 6 of the GPL, and therefore represents a copyright violation to everyone outside RedHat who has contributed source the project uses.

RedHat could solve this by making all GPL'd source available to the public. Or by stipulating that redistributed code under the GPL must have RedHat trademarks removed. Or by removing all GPL'd sourcecode in RHEL and using their own internally developed code, or using code released under the BSD or MIT, etc. licenses. A RedHat RHE-BSD, for example.

The trademark issue is just a RedHat Herring, so to speak. I'm fine with them demanding all RedHat trademarks be removed from GPL'd sourcecode related to the RHEL which others redistribute. But they may not violate the copyrights of contributors. Or else they should be sued for copyright infringement like anyone else. That's the position I'm taking.

Note that I don't demand the complete RHEL system. Components under BSD or MIT licenses, or those entirely written by RedHat, could be withheld and I wouldn't care about that. This argument is specific to only GPL'd materials contributed by external parties.

And to be clear: when I say, 'Sue their asses,' I don't mean in a North Carolina court where RedHat could judge shop for their best outcome. As per their contractual terms. No, I think California or New York would be best, because those jurisdictions are most likely to protect the intellectual property rights of contributors RedHat includes in RHEL.