On Wednesday 28 March 2007 15:31, Raj Mathur wrote: > On Wednesday 28 March 2007 13:42, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote: > > [snip] > > > > cops dont understand definitions. A list of linux distros need to > > be given. And a list of commonly used software should also be > > given - such software should require a license. Example of the > > list would be: > > > > Microsoft windows - various versions > > coreldraw > > pagemaker > > photoshop > > RHEL > > [more snip] > > Does RHEL require a license to be run? As far as I know running an > unlicensed copy of RHEL is, at worst, a trademark violation, plus > you don't get updates.
Afaik it's also a copyright violation IF you copy it with the trademarks as RH owns the copyright on the entire iso. Once you remove RH logos, restricted for distribution apps and drivers, stop calling it Rh and then copy (which means that the rpms are verbatim copy but your new cd is not), it should be fine. And instead of going thru such contortions just use any of the other sensible distros. As someone said recently both M$ and RH are members of NASSCOM ... hmm what about Novell. Prorly still figuring out what agreements they signed. -- Rgds JTD -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
