On Monday 28 November 2005 00:43, Bryan J. Smith wrote: > > While RHEL does distribute some packages that aren't FOSS, their > > distribution rights don't necessarily extend to the CentOS project. > > Or any other redistribution, hence the issue. Redistributing them > _would_ be illegal. ;-> Not all closed-source software is illegal for public distribution. For example, NVIDIA specifically allows their closed source drivers to be redistributed (for Linux / BSD only): http://www.nvidia.com/object/nv_swlicense.html It is not legal distribute GPL software everywhere. Not all countries permit their people to run OS's that can tunnel encrypted traffic (squid and SSH), or sniff traffic out of the air (wireless acrd and ethereal). >I'm sure there are a few others. But Fedora/CentOS and Debian are the >only ones I know of that have 100% redistributable software. OpenSUSE is 100% GPL until modified (like Fedora). The fact that 99.9% of its users make it non-GPL compliant so they can play their MP3s and DVDs doesn't change the fact that when you download its all GPL. >And OpenSuSE really needs to address the fact >that the SuSE Linux Professional it's based on it's either Keep in mind where their home base is. Frankly, any move made against them by a US software company would only generate sympathy, and could be potentially unsuccessful given MS's rather poor track record n EU court's lately.