GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Originally posted by Pcghost Am I the only one that smells the hand of microsoft all over this? Am I just a conspiracy nut, or does anyone else see this?
Distribution: RH 6.2, Gen2, Knoppix,arch, bodhi, studio, suse, mint
Posts: 3,304
Rep:
at some point in the past, the linux kernel had no
stolen code in it. what's wrong with using a slightly
older kernel, and still using all the current software
with it, or the debian bsd thing.
if there is ANY stolen code, rip it out then fix what's left.
ibm is the one getting sued here. there's no basis for
an end user to get sued.
Distribution: RH 6.2, Gen2, Knoppix,arch, bodhi, studio, suse, mint
Posts: 3,304
Rep:
i do not think there was any stolen code. i just get tired
of people talking about linux being banned because of
stolen code. even if there is stolen code, the practical
result to linux users is almost nil. no banned linux.
Distribution: RH 6.2, Gen2, Knoppix,arch, bodhi, studio, suse, mint
Posts: 3,304
Rep:
Quote:
Originally posted by TazLinux if that is true, then that means that everyone who has ran unix has ran an unregistered/pirated or stolen os or something along those lines?
no it doesn't. it would only mean that ibm violated
a contract with sco. sco is now amending their
complaint to include copyright violations too, i think.
assuming, and this is HUGE freaking assumption,
that a copyright violation was found, the court would
then have to issue a remedy. remember how long
that part went on, after microsoft was found guilty?
assuming this isn't settled, this would drag out for years.
as soon as linux people find out what the code is that
is in dispute, it will probably be redone, just in case, and
no longer be relevant, years before there could even be
a finding by the court.
the only reasonable thing to do would be to make ibm
pay some money for these trade secrets they have
or haven't taken.
if a copyright violation was found, then possibly
people or businesses who wished to continue using
the (by then years old) kernel, they should pay a
license. but basically that would require people to
turn themselves in. like you writing the riaa a letter
telling them you made a copy of a cd and you want to
pay for it.
this all assumes.
sco owns trade secrets and or copyrights ( doubt it )
that ibm stole ( doubt that )
that was significant to kernel development ( no way)
and people using linux were unjustly enriched
by getting to use linux for free ( possible, but all the
previous would have to be true ), and
the court thinks that people should have to pay, even
though they had no way of knowing that the code
was stolen, or what code was stolen. ( fat chance )
Distribution: RH 6.2, Gen2, Knoppix,arch, bodhi, studio, suse, mint
Posts: 3,304
Rep:
i have a deadline for sco. they better meet it or else.
if they don't meet it, they're really gonna be in trouble.
things are really gonna be different in sco land i'll tell you.
they're really gonna get it. and when they find out what
i'm talking about, they're really extra plus gonna get it.
then everybody's gonna get it, and that whole group
will be in trouble. all of em that are affected by sco
not meeting my deadline. they can settle if they want,
in fact, they better settle, or else. or they're all gonna
get it in fact everybody could be in violation if sco
doesn't meet my deadline, they'll all get it too. they'll
all be in trouble. big trouble mister. big big trouble.
("is my stock going up yet? good. sell sell sell")
they'll all be in big trouble, big huge all kinds of trouble.
billions of troubles. i just want them to meet my
deadline, cause i value my property. thats all.
my deadline might be coming soon, but it might not,
and i can't tell you what it is, but it's big trouble thats
for sure.
Originally posted by futurist This is not a farce.
linux might be banned if SCO won the case.
thats rubbish. No matter what the outcome is, Linux would survive. If they decided that huge parts of the code was stolen, it would be rewritten and reimplemented, and due to the amount of worldwide interest in this case, chances are that would take a matter of a few days/weeks.
i think it is a farce, as many others do. This case will fall through and SCO will be laughed out the courts.
I dunno which reports you lot have been reading recently, but the "sample" evidence currently revealed by SCO is 85 lines of code, with "identical" developers notes/comments.
85 lines of code is diddlysquat.
I'm pretty sure that could be re-written - that's presuming that SCO can actually prove that they own the UNIX copyright/patent and not NOVELL or whoever.
I think i'll wait and see what happens.
Irrespective of that, it will take a court official, clutching a court order, standing behind me before I will even entertain the prospect of uninstalling my linux!
Distribution: RH 6.2, Gen2, Knoppix,arch, bodhi, studio, suse, mint
Posts: 3,304
Rep:
i run my own version of unix called willix. i took the
linux source code and removed all the comments.
now it's legal. the comments are what sco was
complaining about anyway, right?
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.