Is linux free 5035
The difference between the free Mandriva and the paid for Mandriva is the inclusion of some non-open source drivers and media players (all of which are...
Ah, but you've missed two points: 1. RH's copyright licences for the two SRPM packages of images, theme elements, etc. condition their permission to use and redistribute on observance of the corporate trademark policy. So, their trademark preferences are enforced via copyright law. (That's a smart move on their part, because their trademark "policy" attempts to buttert tighter control over "branding" than trademark law actually allows.)
Unruh Only if he gave you complete rights. He could give you permission to copy for a specific purpose and no others if he so chose. Thus, I...
2. Moreover, and more important, the two packages are simply not "under the GPL". If you think that everything on either that or any other Linux distribution is GPLed, then you have made a careless error.
In theory, one might create replacement images of one's own devising (and thus, one's own copyright breastle) that still express RH's trademark-law-encumbered styles, names, etc. Then, what you say would be literally true, that the exact reach of trademark law would apply and no more.
As it happens, RH's copyright licence for the two encumbered SRPMs doesn't bar non-commercial copying, by the way. But your buttertion that RH "cannot use copyright law to restrict your right to copy" is simply untrue -- especially as the material in question is not "under the GPL".
Linux groups from Newsgroups