I've seen a number of links to downloading the full Pro version of SuSE 9.2 on various forums on the net.

My question is - is this legal? I guess I'm still unsure about what the open source license really means. Is it perfectly reasonable for someone to post this distribution somewhere like ed2k or bittorrent?

You can download the full Pro version from SuSE's FTP server: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/current/ It's not an ISO, however.
The thing is that GPL forces to provide sources of the software, it doesn't force to provide ISOs.

i see. Well I checked the link you posted but it was still on 9.1. I looked in the 9.2 section and it wasn't there; just a few components.

I also read they were not going to release 9.2 personal edition either, just pro???

Anyway - if you are looking for the ISO's for 9.2 Pro, you can

[Mod-edit]link removed
To the best of my knowledge it's not OK
with SuSE to distribute their distro like this.
The FTP install that Mara pointed out is the
legal way of a download ...
[/Mod-edit]

Thanks a lot, I've been looking for 2 weeks for these torrents and I've found only cd1 + cd2

I don't understand why there are only src.rpm packages on their ftp server,
it seems that novell won't release suse 9.2 via ftp !

they will release it but usually a month or so after the initial release of the packaged versions.

brilliant

thanks for that bittorent Tester12

I have been having the same problems as you. I downloaded suse 9.1 personal but wanted iso's for professional.

That's a NO-NO, and I fixed the post. Please,
don't start that kind of stuff here.


Cheers,
Tink

I have been doing some reading on this and actually, me posting a link to a torrent, offering you a free download is not illegal. However, if I were to sell you SuSE 9.2 Pro, then that would be illegal.

I can understand why suse don't want everyone downloading the software free though ...

Torrents are legal too, because you don't get a support key automatically when you get isos. The support key and printed handbooks is actually what you pay for when buying pro version. So sharing the support key is illegal, but NOT the isos - as long as software on the CDs is free software (and since 9.1 it is), according to GPL, Suse can't take away users' rights to redistribute isos, although suse itself has the right not to provide isos for free.

But posting such links on lq - that's another question...

so is SuSE 9.2 going to be available for download?

Not sure about this! If you rip the original (bought) SuSE CD's to an ISO, the ISO contains software that is not under GPL! And the distribution is therefore illegal. If you download the FTP version when it becomes available (where SuSE has removed those packages) and create ISO's from that, the distribution might be OK, I don't know.

If providing the link is illegal, I don't know either, but it might be considered immoral.

EDIT:

Yes, see Mara's link in post#2.

Either way, for the £60 I think it is probably worth buying. Soon as I save enough pennies, I'm going to buy the full edition.

Ok, suse included 3 commercial progz on cd 5 in 9.1 afaik - textmaker & planmaker - a text editor which no one needs because of OOo, Koffice etc. and something else - dunno what

But 1) are these programs included in suse 9.2?


2) does their license which is included on cd, (not usual license!) explicitly prohibits redistribution of the cd?

I think not.

and there's nothing immoral
it's just as immoral as providing slackware isos for dl

Most likely, since there have always been commercial packages included. But maybe someone who bought 9.2 could answer this question.

But here you are wrong! Since your signature locates you in germany, you'll probably understand this:

http://www.linux-magazin.de/Artikel/...cht/recht.html

I disagree! Since slackware distribution is not illegal, there is a clear difference.

from
http://www.linux-magazin.de/Artikel/...cht/recht.html
>>Sie müssen also die Lizenzen der einzelnen Programmpakete lesen und beachten.

(You should read and consider the licenses of each package)

>>darauf weist die Firma in der Datei »COPYRIGHT.de« auf den Installationsmedien auch selbst hin.

(it's claimed in COPYRIGHT.de file)



COPYRIGHT.de DOES NOT claim explicitly that copying of CDs is prohibited.

The licenses of commercial packages at least in my 9.0 do NOT explicitly prohibit the copying of the media the packages are on.



The 'immorality' is about the distribution of the FTP packages.


To those who want to redistribute CDs:
If you're unsure about commercial packages, why not to burn the CD 5 without them?