On TechRepublic: Windows 7 keyboard shortcut cheat sheet
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 12 of 44:
Next »
« Previous
It apparently wasn't obvious to you
There is no legal obligation to replace copyright-infringing code (once identified) once removed. THAT'S why Red Hat is offering the warranty: They will REPLACE whatever was taken out.

Your attempt to poke at them by saying that they were required to remove it by law is not the same as Red Hat REPLACING the removed code. Therefore, your attempt at denigrating Red Hat went nowhere because you were misrepresenting what Red Hat actually was offering.
Posted by: dscherf   Posted on: 01/20/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use
Reply to Story Reply to Message

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

looking up for SCO  cvos | 01/20/04
The only people who will see any of that money...  rbethell | 01/20/04
Why would anyone deal with this?  Mike Cox | 01/20/04
ROTFLMAO  Patrick Jones | 01/20/04
I doff the fedora to you Master Cox  Squawkbox | 01/20/04
Brilliant  NemesisNL | 01/20/04
Man, that was a perfect riff. Author! Author!  dicktaurus@... | 01/20/04
Errors in the last paragraphs  mlybbert | 01/20/04
How big of them!  No_Ax_to_Grind | 01/20/04
"Replace" != "Remove"  dscherf | 01/20/04
Well, um,, DUH!!!  No_Ax_to_Grind | 01/20/04
It apparently wasn't obvious to you  dscherf | 01/20/04
Obvious to anyone with a brain.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 01/20/04
Not legally required  dscherf | 01/20/04
Let me use little words for you.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 01/20/04
IP != Physical Property  dscherf | 01/20/04
No  NemesisNL | 01/20/04
one born every minute...  Chris Moller | 01/20/04
What a cute little rant.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 01/20/04
What a cute little rant.  Loverock Davidson | 01/20/04
glass house * (stones + throwing) == lots of broken glass (nt)  ryusen | 01/20/04
Ranting vs. needling.  Chris Moller | 01/20/04
Hard to tell with all the noise.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 01/20/04
So stop posting yours  NemesisNL | 01/20/04
Okay, Brilliant, what would you do?  IT_User | 01/20/04
I would ignore it rather than look stupid.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 01/20/04
Copyright = null  IT_User | 01/20/04
Exactly  NemesisNL | 01/20/04
SCO has no problem hiding UC Berkeley (BSD) Copyright notices  B.O.F.H. | 01/20/04
SCO Donations  MuffinMan_z | 01/20/04
Copyrighted code not in dispute  dscherf | 01/20/04
If this is a contract case ...  George Jay | 01/20/04
THe suit is about "methods and concepts".  No_Ax_to_Grind | 01/20/04
That seems to be the latest take...  IT_User | 01/20/04
No it's not  NemesisNL | 01/20/04
I believe you are correct, although...  IT_User | 01/20/04
PR versus statements to the Court  dscherf | 01/20/04
to late to be reluctant  NemesisNL | 01/20/04
HAHAHAHAHAH  poogranite | 01/20/04
I want whatever you're putting in your muffins! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA  dicktaurus@... | 01/20/04
MuffinMan = Bill Gates (or a dwarf clone of him)  cyberian_z | 01/25/04
Private Conversation between Stallman and Torvalds  MuffinMan_z | 01/20/04
sco code  JWatson77 | 01/20/04
Real Issue of IBM VS SCO  john public | 01/21/04

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement

SmartPlanet

Click Here