[ILUG] SuSE redistribution

[Rick Moen]

Correcting a wrong choice of word, just in case the result was unclear:


Quoting Rory Browne (rory.browne at gmail.com):

> IANA[LSB](Lawyer, Soclicitor, or Barrister), but suse specificly asks
> you to accept a licence anytime you install a package that isn't free
> software(or open source). You got the cd/dvd from SuSE, and provided
> you don't agree to a license with these other companies, and don't use
> their software, than I can't reasonably see why you should be subject
> to their license.

The question at issue was whether you have the right to redistribute.
Copyright law by default reserves that right to the property holder.
                                                    ^^^^^^^^ copyright

So, if you as a purchaser of a SUSE Linux Professional Edition boxed set
don't accept, e.g., the licence to MoneyPlex (and/or the other three),
where specifically would you be gaining the right to redistribute it?

I'm reminded of SCO Group's one-time tactic of trying to convince the
courts that GPLv2 is unlawful and unenforceable.  Then, some slightly
brighter person pointed out to them that, if the GPL licensing grant on
software they're shipping were nullified, they'd have _less_ legal right
to the software, not more -- and they'd lose the right to redistribute.
They dropped that effort in a hurry.