Questions[license](ubuntu)

I am in a position where a company is trying to sell me a modified version of Ubuntu with added proprietary binaries. They are selling it as a complete distro on a usb stick. It clearly shows UBUNTU when booting and at the login screen. Am I able to freely copy this distro and are the company selling it in breach of the Canonical rules?

I am a bit confused about these two terms. Are there differences between them?

Since our own Alaukik asked me to put a few scripts under GPL-License I wondered if I am doing it correctly. The points that concern me are:

1. Do I have to include the whole license with my project or is a comment like # Copyright by John Doe, 2011 Licensed under the MIT license: http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php legally sufficient?
2. Do I have to include my real name or is an e-Mail or other alias legally waterproof?
3. Is the year important? I would guess 'yes' as copyrights expire in most countries after a certain period. What happens if I don't?
4. Should I use GPL over MIT? I tend towards MIT as it is more permissive and I don't care whether my scripts are used in closed source software.

Update:

There is a very good page on 'How to use GNU licenses for your own software'. The gnu website also makes suggestons on how to aply the licenses to your project (™Flimm). That covers a lot for the GPL.

Bottom line - license choice:
If you want to support free software, don't use too free a license. Disallowing proprietary use gives free software an edge over proprietary programs. In theory with some licenses re-usage of your code must credit your original. But re-usage is difficult to proof and some corporations might just not credit you. However, if you do want to spread your software as wide as possible, i.e you don't care about proprietary products using your software, then use MIT or LGPL. If in doubt use the more restrictive license and add a line, saying you may consider permitting uses outside of the license terms on a by-case basis. This way commercial users with a project worthy of your work have a chance.

Bottom line - copyright dispute:
Include as much information as you dare to make proving it's really your brainchild easier. Have a lawsuit over the ownership in the back of your head. Poor man's copyright is mailing a printed copy of your source to your home address. If the envelope is unbroken, the postmark is valid evidence at court and provides a date and a verified address. An e-mail instead of your full name to identify you should be okay and sufficient proof but: Better safe, than sorry.

After a recent update, ttf-mscorefonts-installer prompted me to accept its license agreement.

 ┌─────────────────┤ Configuring ttf-mscorefonts-installer ├─────────────────┐
 │                                                                           │ 
 │ TrueType core fonts for the Web EULA                                        
 │                                                                             
 │ END-USER LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR MICROSOFT SOFTWARE                           
 │                                                                             
 │ IMPORTANT-READ CAREFULLY: This Microsoft End-User License Agreement         
 │ ("EULA") is a legal agreement between you (either an individual or a        
 │ single entity) and Microsoft Corporation for the Microsoft software         
 │ accompanying this EULA, which includes computer software and may include    
 │ associated media, printed materials, and "on-line" or electronic            
 │ documentation ("SOFTWARE PRODUCT" or "SOFTWARE"). By exercising your        
 │ rights to make and use copies of the SOFTWARE PRODUCT, you agree to be      
 │ bound by the terms of this EULA. If you do not agree to the terms of        
 │ this EULA, you may not use the SOFTWARE PRODUCT.                            
 │                                                                             
 │                                  <Ok>                                       
 │                                                                           │ 
 └───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ 

Screenshot:

For some reason my terminal will not allow me to accept, or for some reason I am pressing the wrong hotkey... I've tried every letter on the keyboard and Enter among others... I'm sure there is a very simple and obvious solution to this.

I've also just tried to remove the package completely however the terminal states that due to the package not being correctly installed, I should reinstall the package before removing it. Very frustrating! Essentially, because I cannot successfully install this package, I can't really ever upgrade my system because I always have to end up terminating the terminal with the license agreement (thus the upgrade fails).

What license does Ubuntu fall into (GPL, MIT, a mix)? Would it be legal to modify it and redistribute my modified version?