SCO backs off Linux invoice plan

TalkBack 5 of 33:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

Can you get it straight, ZD Net?

SCO cannot sell a 'Linux' license. SCO holds no copyrights over anything Linux.

SCO claims IBM violated a contract that has to do with trade secrets.

Until a judge says anything in Linux belongs to SCO anybody would be dumb for buying a 'Linux' license. Why would anybody be dumb enough to buy a license without knowing what it is for?

Since SCO is not forthcoming in what they claim belongs to them it is highly doubtful a judge will make anyone pay much, if anything, on the off-chance there happened to be a file or two that actually came from the ancient AT&T code, or more correctly, the museum code. The judge that will be hearing this particularly frowns upon the actions of SCO. If the rumors I've heard are correct. This is some of what the judge said about a similar event:

...In his ruling, Kimball said Jacobsen did not "express any disapproval" of the series until 1999, after the third volume had been published. "Had Jacobsen voiced his disapproval in 1996, Hughes would have had the opportunity to take the offending material out of the books," Kimball wrote. "For Jacobsen to wait until three volumes of the series had been published before voicing his disapproval, when it is clear he had ample opportunity to let Hughes know of his disapproval as early as 1996,....

Any of this sound familiar? It seems this particular judge has plenty to say about not giving someone an opportunity to remove any 'offending material'.

The fact SCO is attempting to sub-license Linux puts them in violation of the license they use to distribute their Linux. SCO is the copyright infringer here. Expect to see a class-action against SCO for violating the copyrights of all the Linux developers.

They certainly seem to have been quiet lately. What's puzzling about this is the fact SCO is doing everything they can to keep this out of court. Why would they not want the opportunity to prove their claims? At any rate, in about 2 weeks a judge should rule on whether SCO has to put-up the proof to back their claims. I, for one, can hardly wait. Everyone wants to see what SCO has. It they have pinned their hopes on code they copied from BSD, such as the 'proof' they offered at their last public circus, I'd say they are in a lot of trouble.

When is ZD Net finally going to understand SCO cannot sell a 'Linux' license and stop giving stories titles designed to invoke arguments. I'd expect to see this behavior with the National Enquirer. ZD Net is supposed to be a reputable source.

Posted by: zd-spam   Posted on: 10/15/03 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• VMware Infrastructure: A Guide to Bottom-Line Benefits VMware Frustrated by the costs of maintain ever larger data centers?or building ... Download Now
• Live Webcast: Activate Today! Realize ROI with Intel(r) vPro? Technology and LANDesk Intel Join the team from the Intel vPro Expert Center for an informative Webcast ... Download Now
• Five Steps to Determine When to Virtualize YourServers VMware Server virtualization isn't just for big companies. Entry-level ... Download Now