On CBS MoneyWatch: 5 Things You Should Buy at Walmart
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 33 of 45:
Next »
« Previous
Not forcing violation, because
only if SCO wins is anyone in violation. Until then, they have not proven ownership rights and therefore have no valid claim for license fees.

If they do win, highly unlikely in my opinion, then still the only ones liable would be those who distributed Linux AFTER SCO had legally established rights to the code, and removal of the infringing code would be a legally permissible way to avoid liability.

SCO would be mandated by the court to notify those distributing SCO's code and then make a demand that they either remove the infringing code or replace it with non-infringing code.

We also have the matter of SCO's distribution of Linux. Unless SCO can prove that the Linux that they distributed did not contain the code in question, I believe that the GPL will prevail and SCO will lose.
Posted by: Update victim   Posted on: 03/04/04 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

Start yer engines, mi amigos!  Bobby Sskcat | 03/03/04
Obviously, you didn't read the article...  DarbyOhara | 03/04/04
You're not paying too much attention, either  CobraA1 | 03/04/04
of course...  ryusen | 03/04/04
Evidence of Microsoft's funding SCO's anti-Linux initiative.  wackoae | 03/04/04
Just one of what will be MANY M$-$CO "smoking guns"....  dicktaurus@... | 03/04/04
I'll show you mine if you will show me yours  Squawkbox | 03/03/04
As did IBM.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 03/03/04
It figures  Squawkbox | 03/03/04
It's a good thing..  Bobby Sskcat | 03/03/04
And that matters how in this case?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 03/04/04
Missed part of the article?  hortons@... | 03/04/04
What case have you been following?  IT_User | 03/04/04
Man would I LOVE to be in that court room!  No_Ax_to_Grind | 03/03/04
IBM isn't afraid of producing source code.  Zogg | 03/03/04
Can SCO prove their claim?  Squawkbox | 03/03/04
What makes you think they have a case?  Bobby Sskcat | 03/03/04
Nice post Bobby I'm proud of ya.  Squawkbox | 03/03/04
I doubt they could  CobraA1 | 03/04/04
my theory is...  ryusen | 03/04/04
Can IBM dodge the email and memo bullet  nite_w0lf | 03/03/04
The could say....  NemesisNL | 03/04/04
Aw C'mon ZDNET why'd you pull talkback on this story?  Squawkbox | 03/03/04
LOL  CobraA1 | 03/04/04
chances are...  ryusen | 03/04/04
And still no mention  NemesisNL | 03/04/04
SCO. producing code  crocd | 03/04/04
Within 45 days  NemesisNL | 03/04/04
This should clarify things...............  nite_w0lf | 03/04/04
Pure Strategy from SCO  toomuchgreeatea@... | 03/04/04
Actually Not!  ShadeTree | 03/04/04
SCO is forcing Linux users to be illegal if we don't want to use their code  CobraA1 | 03/04/04
Not forcing violation, because  Update victim | 03/04/04
you're forgetting something...  ryusen | 03/04/04
I hope so  CobraA1 | 03/04/04
No! Don't throw it out  Update victim | 03/04/04
Bring all fact?s in front of the court...  Chris.Papoudaris@... | 03/04/04
Code Transference - Mode and Direction - Linuxgate ???  webgecko | 03/04/04
Microsoft funding SCO's anti-Linux initiative.  wackoae | 03/04/04
44 days to identify the code  B.O.F.H. | 03/04/04
IBM had 7,200 witnesses?  Chad_z | 03/04/04
When Will They Convict Microsoft for This Ploy?  claytonmuhler | 03/04/04
Actually one could argue that MS is funding Unix development by paying SCO  balsover | 03/12/04
Nope  agramont@... | 03/16/04
We NEED the press here - try this ZDNET  UnivComputerGuy | 03/08/04

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement

SmartPlanet

Click Here