On Tue, 2003-07-22 at 12:01, Rick Warner wrote: > On Mon, 2003-07-21 at 19:07, Edward Dekkers wrote: > > > > ... But, SCO has waved their > wand and made nebulous allegations that some of their IP, without > specifying what it is, has leaked into Linux, including the kernel.
Actually their claim is specifically the kernel; and more specifically the multiprocessor capabilities that appeared rather suddenly in 2.4. > They make statements that their IP rights have been violated, but > refuse to show anyone what part of the code they believe they own. They will show code to people willing to sign a brutal NDA. So far only a few semi-informed journalist types seem to have taken the bait. > Ignoring for the moment that they may own nothing as far as any code is > concerned (Novell's claim), Novell has significantly backed off their original claim that they only sold limited rights. > *IF* someone knew what parts of Linux are in dispute, those sections > could be rewritten in a 'clean room' environment and the dispute for > on-going claims would be nil. That seems to clearly be the concern of SCO - that disclosing their supposed "evidence" would cause it to disappear from the code. But that may not nullify the claim if they can show damages. It's likely that everyone on this list, myself included, is hoping very much that this SCO suit baseless and will quickly go away. In reality though, none of us really knows if there is any truth to their claim. David Boise is a damn good lawyer, and they claim that the source code has hundreds of directly copied UNIX files including comments, errors and typos. If their claim is sound, it's possible the only way Linux could remain "whole" is for IBM to buy SCO outright. Again, I hope they're full of crap - but it's possible they're not. Some interesting stuff here http://www.bsdnewsletter.com/2003/07/News91.html regis -- rm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
