On Tue, 2005-11-29 at 18:17 -0500, ryan wrote: > Its very debatable. What is "illegal redistribution" in one country is not in > another. Please name a country? > Of course, I'm sure MS doesn't like it when third world countries engage in > rampant copying/distribution of Windows and Office - but I bet most of those > countries have no laws on their books that make software "piracy" illegal. Bull! They _do_. They just don't enforce them! Lack of enforcement does _not_ mean "legal." Just because the piracy rate in Japan is 92% and places like Singapore is 99% (oh the irony of their "values" ;-) does _not_ mean it's "legal" to illegally copy works. They just don't enforce it. _Huge_ difference! > What is illegal in Redmond, USA is not necessarily illegal in the rest of the > world and vice versa. But countries that have signed certain international treaties and laws on copyrights with the United States _are_ bound by them. Even China is bound by man agreements they have signed, and their lack of enforcement is a powerful bargaining tool right now with their membership (or potential membership) in various organizations. Again, we are _way_off_ the path of my _original_ point. You guys can really argue to the point of absolute futility on these matters, but CentOS and its repositories -- like Fedora Core/Extras, official Debian repositories, etc... -- are designed so they are 100% redistributable (and are not necessarily 100% open source, read all the licenses ;-). That way there are _no_ legal issues with redistribution into another project, for consultants and integrators, etc... If you really "don't care" and just freely redistribute Gentoo, Ubuntu, Knoppix (non-official releases with 100% pure Debian), etc... then please do _not_ step foot in any corporation I consult for or work at. ;-> -- Bryan J. Smith mailto:b.j.smith at ieee.org http://thebs413.blogspot.com ------------------------------------------ Some things (or athletes) money can't buy. For everything else there's "ManningCard."