Quoting Michael Conry (michael.conry at gmail.com):
> Not necessarily redistributable at all. SuSE/Novell's compilation
> copyrighted work isn't under a GPL or similar licence (as far as I
> know). If you create a derivative version by, for example, deleting
> these rpms, then even the limited permissions SuSE give for
> redistribution of their disks will not necessarily apply to the
> derived work.
A brief review of the term "compilation copyright":
If I publish a collection of other people's work, and _if_ my job of
selecting and arranging those works is sufficiently creative that it'd
convince a judge that it's a substantively creative thing in itself,
then I automatically gain copyright title to the selection/arrangement.
LICENSE.TXT on CD#1 does indeed seem to assert such a copyright, and
then asserts that recipients automatically consent to a licence -- which
is included: Redistribution is permitted to all outside parties
provided you receive no consideration and don't bundle the thing with
any other product or service.
So, the selection/arrangement of packages _is_ licensed with the right
of redistribution. (And yes, merely deleting a few packages from the
list would probably not escape the compilation copyright encumbrance --
if such a property would be ruled to exist at all.)
Maintained by the ILUG website team. The aim of Linux.ie is to
support and help commercial and private users of Linux in Ireland. You can
display ILUG news in your own webpages, read backend
information to find out how. Networking services kindly provided by HEAnet, server kindly donated by
Dell. Linux is a trademark of Linus Torvalds,
used with permission. No penguins were harmed in the production or maintenance
of this highly praised website. Looking for the
Indian Linux Users' Group? Try here. If you've read all this and aren't a lawyer: you should be!