Is there anything illegal about selling Ubuntu with restrited extras preinstalled?

[diablo75]

If I were to build a computer for someone (charging a little for labor), would there be anything wrong with me installing flash, java and stuff like that for them? I only ask because part of installing that software involves agreeing to a license, which they're not present to read and agree to at the moment. So can I do the agreeing for them legally?

[popch]

Why not explain it to them before and have them agree when ordering the complete system?

[Lord Illidan]

You could always send that license to the users via e-mail perhaps and tell them, do you comply with this? But IANAL..

[Superkoop]

I think as long as you explain it first it would be fine, since when you get Windows on your computer, and lots of other programs, you have to agree to those. So if you explained to the person first, then they could agree to the agreements beforehand. (you may need a written signature for it to be legal though)

[heartburnkid]

Why would you need a written signature? It's not like you need to sign anything to install the software...

[az]

If I were to build a computer for someone (charging a little for labor), would there be anything wrong with me installing flash, java and stuff like that for them? I only ask because part of installing that software involves agreeing to a license, which they're not present to read and agree to at the moment. So can I do the agreeing for them legally?

All packages include the license under which they are distributed in /usr/share/doc/*

Now the problem is not that you will be agreeing with the license conditions on behalf of your client, because that is implied. The problem with the license terms of the restricted-extras packages is with redistribution.

Those packages do not ship with Ubuntu because, although the end-user is entitled to download, install and use the software at no cost, no one is legally entitled to distribute the software. Other non-free software ships with Ubuntu and is under different license terms than the GPL, and you do not have to agree to the terms when you install. For example, the non-free drivers. Anyone is entitled to redistribute them, so that's why it's not a problem.

By installing the restricted software on your client's computer, you are distributing these packages and may be in violation of the terms. Although, there may be provisions which differentiates between distributing the software to one person (installing it for them) as opposed to distributing it in the sense of making it publicly available on the internet.

[popch]

By installing the restricted software on your client's computer, you are distributing these packages and may be in violation of the terms.

If, on the other hand, you are in possession of an order instructing you to install those items of software on your customers' behalf, I think that that should do the trick. However, the items and their respective licenses ought to be explicitly mentioned.

But then, as others have stated, IANAL 2.

[pbpersson]

Mint is a version of Ubuntu that includes all that stuff

If you install Mint it is a one-shot deal and is much easier

Is there any way you can sit with the user and install it for them knowing it will only take a few minutes?

Honestly, I stopped reading license agreements years ago. Now I just say "yes" to everything and it bothers me.....but life is too short.

I guess if I am installing something I have never seen before I skim over it just to make sure I'm not agreeing they can connect into my machine and download all my secrets......

[diablo75]

Well I am not building any systems yet, although I would like to. A good friend of mine is about to graduate from Devry with a Bachelors degree in project management, and he knows how to deal with the paperwork it takes to start your own business, legally speaking. We want to start a business with each other. I'd handle a lot of the technical stuff (though he can too), but he'll be primarily responsible for tax paperwork and things like that.

So we're bouncing potential business ideas around, and one of them I feel like doing is starting a company that builds made to order Ubuntu PC's. I'd like to have a wider selection than what you see on Dell, and I'd like to have one model that appeals to gamers (have certain games pre-installed). And that's enough said about that... ;)

I don't think it's absolutely necessary to have things like flash pre-installed on a PC, though I would like to give the customer an option during their ordering process to request it be installed by us before it ships to them. Would that be fair?

[Superkoop]

Why would you need a written signature? It's not like you need to sign anything to install the software...

In the US at least, (and I see the original poster is from the US), a lot of times if you want to do something dealing in legal issues on the behalf of another, you need written consent saying you can do so. Generally it's not a big deal, but if the OP were running some kind of business or organization and this isn't just friends he is doing this for, it would be a good idea to have written consent.
(AKAIK the reason for writing is so you have proof, and for certain things on-line (i.e. the FAFSA) you need either to sign it written, or you need a PIN.)

That was why I said it may be a good idea to get it in writing, just for protection. (like when you loan someone money, you want to get it in writing, otherwise you have nothing saying they owe you money)