Since some will try to make the comparison, in fact CentOS and Scientific Linux do not use RedHat branding. They are also not covered by RedHat service agreements. There is no conflict or issue. Mint similarly also does NOT use Ubuntu branding, trademarks, etc. So what is this about?
http://distrowatch.com/weekly.... Clem responded, "Money isn't a primary concern. Although the original fee was in the hundreds of thousands pounds, it was easily reduced to a single digit figure. The licensing aims at restricting what Mint can and cannot do, mostly in relation to the OEM market, to prevent Mint from competing with Canonical in front of the same commercial partners."
If this is indeed true, then Canonical is demanding the right to tell Mint where they could NOT offer their distribution (such as OEM's) . It is this aspect that would clearly and openly violate the GNU GPL, and is nothing more than a crude shakedown more worthy of our local mob.