Is linux free 5011
Er, didn't *I* just get through referring to the "Rural Telephone Service Be careful: The term "compilation" is yet...
It is Redhat that makes them more than "mere aggregation". It is redhat who claims that those items prevent others from copying or distributing the distribution. That they are on the same CD does not make them "mere aggregation". It may be necessary for aggregation, but is not sufficient for "mere aggregation". There must be a independence of the two, that the two items are independent of each other. This is clearly not true of the Redhat material. Its whole purpose is to be displayed at different and places in the running of the distribution. Its reason for existence depends on the rest of the distribution. That is more than "mere aggregation."
These are problematic but maybe less so, since they some are truely independent However, many have been altered by the distribution authors to make them run better with teh distribution. As such they become more than mere aggregation. Now those parts which are more lenient than the GPL presumably are not in license conflict. Ie, it is far from clear that this is not the case. You may hope it is the case.
However, in Redhat's case one of the main purposes of the trademark files is precisely to restrict the copying and distribution of the distribution. That is in in clear conflict with a central point of the GPL. Ie, Redhat's material is a direct attack on the rights established by the GPL, while none of the other parts make any such claim.
This is a VERY dangerous misconception. (ObDisclaimer: I unfortunately cannot speak to Canadian or B.C. statute or caselaw, per se, and can in general speak only of standard USA copyright law. Your local mileage may...
The whole purpose of the Redhat stuff is to restrict your rights. (Ask say cheapbytes if you doubt this)
Linux groups from Newsgroups