Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?

[Gordon Messmer]

Les Mikesell wrote:
> 
> The statement is not wrong - the reason a few that are listed as 
> compatible is that the permit themselves to be replaced by the GPL.

You can not legally replace the copyright on a work that was created by 
someone else, unless the license of that work specifically allows you to 
do so.  I believe that there is at least one such license listed, but in 
general, you are incorrect.

This was at the heart of a problem in the Linux kernel, where a driver 
taken from OpenBSD had its copyright notice mistakenly removed:
http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20070829001634

The entire conversation may prove educational.  I think that someone 
from the FSF wrote an article about mixing licensed works after the 
atheros driver mistake to clarify the legalities for non-lawyers.

> When 
> combined in a work with GPL components any other attributes of the 
> original licenses no longer apply.

As above, incorrect.