LinuxQuestions.org
Review your favorite Linux distribution.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - General
User Name
Password
Linux - General This Linux forum is for general Linux questions and discussion.
If it is Linux Related and doesn't seem to fit in any other forum then this is the place.

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 06-27-2003, 12:44 AM   #1
sridharinfinity
Member
 
Registered: May 2003
Location: India
Distribution: slackware
Posts: 61

Rep: Reputation: 15
Lightbulb Why couldn't have SCO done this?


Hi,





I have some doubt. Remember I am not a lawyer. What SCO complains is some of its UNIX code gets mingled with that of Linux. Right? Why couldn't have SCO done this? They might have stealed some of code snippets from Linux ...
( note: some results say that Linux contains some 2-3 lines of UNIX code with even the comment repeated in english).


...and added it to their UNIX code such that it won't change the logic much. By doing so SCO can later sue some of Linux users as they planned.


Note my point: When SCO have stealed some of Linux code, no body could question it, since Linux is free software with no one owning it and UNIX was older than Linux.





Am I wrong? If I am then please point me out the reasons.





Any thoughts?



Last edited by sridharinfinity; 06-27-2003 at 01:01 AM.
 
Old 06-27-2003, 01:04 AM   #2
2damncommon
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Location: Calif, USA
Distribution: PCLINUXOS
Posts: 2,918

Rep: Reputation: 103Reputation: 103
The people currently running the lawsuit happy SCO did not put any code anywhere. That is the real point.
They are attempting to rewrite history to suit the contracts they have bought.
 
Old 06-27-2003, 04:05 AM   #3
Vlad_M
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2002
Location: Cape Town, South Africa
Distribution: Red Hat 8.0 (Home), Red Hat 8.0 (Work)
Posts: 388

Rep: Reputation: 30
Re: Why couldn't have SCO done this?

Quote:
Originally posted by sridharinfinity
Hi,





I have some doubt. Remember I am not a lawyer. What SCO complains is some of its UNIX code gets mingled with that of Linux. Right? Why couldn't have SCO done this? They might have stealed some of code snippets from Linux ...
( note: some results say that Linux contains some 2-3 lines of UNIX code with even the comment repeated in english).


...and added it to their UNIX code such that it won't change the logic much. By doing so SCO can later sue some of Linux users as they planned.


Note my point: When SCO have stealed some of Linux code, no body could question it, since Linux is free software with no one owning it and UNIX was older than Linux.





Am I wrong? If I am then please point me out the reasons.





Any thoughts?


You are wrong, and conspiracy theories in general are very annoying.

As is your use of huge spaces in between your paragraphs. Are you waiting for a drumroll in between or something?
 
Old 06-27-2003, 04:45 AM   #4
jayakrishnan
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2002
Location: India
Distribution: Slacky 12.1, XP
Posts: 992

Rep: Reputation: 30
Hi


still SCO hasn't shown the code which it says has been stollen
 
Old 06-27-2003, 04:52 AM   #5
Poetics
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2003
Location: California
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 1,181

Rep: Reputation: 49
Sure it has; to the invited individuals who signed the NDA that basically limits their responses to "there are similarities" or "there aren't similarities". I've never heard of such a draconian NDA
 
Old 06-27-2003, 05:27 AM   #6
whansard
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2002
Location: Mosquitoville
Distribution: RH 6.2, Gen2, Knoppix,arch, bodhi, studio, suse, mint
Posts: 3,304

Rep: Reputation: 65
sco said they didn't show to code to everybody because
the code would just get changed. they don't want the
evidence to exist that it would be so easy for us to change
the code. if they showed the code, we would change it,
and they wouldn't be able to sue for copyright violation, and it would show how worthless the code was in the first place if we could change it all out in a few days.
so they want to tell the court that the code is worth billions, and they should be reimbursed for all their
valuable code, while in reality, a few people working
for a few days could replace it all.
thats my take.
 
Old 06-27-2003, 07:40 AM   #7
2damncommon
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Location: Calif, USA
Distribution: PCLINUXOS
Posts: 2,918

Rep: Reputation: 103Reputation: 103
Quote:
still SCO hasn't shown the code which it says has been stolen
The latest guess is code added by Sequent Computer Systems which was then bought by IBM.
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20030619.html
Actually, any code becomes less important when you consider that SCO is attempting to claim everything is a derivative work of their System V. They actually want everyone that has developed software to pay them. Yes, everyone.
http://www.byte.com/documents/s=8276..._marshall.html
 
Old 06-27-2003, 07:51 AM   #8
whansard
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2002
Location: Mosquitoville
Distribution: RH 6.2, Gen2, Knoppix,arch, bodhi, studio, suse, mint
Posts: 3,304

Rep: Reputation: 65
sco is a derivitive work of my dog taking a dump.
my dog's dump stops stinking after a month.
sco is modified to stink permanently.

is it too unlikely that somebody was handed a page
of comments from code, but not the code, and told,
write code that does what the comments say? does
that never happen?
 
Old 06-27-2003, 08:07 AM   #9
2damncommon
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Location: Calif, USA
Distribution: PCLINUXOS
Posts: 2,918

Rep: Reputation: 103Reputation: 103
The code that SCO is hollering about now was put there on purpose by Sequent doing work on the Linux kernel. SCO is claiming Sequent had no right to do this. They are holding IBM, which bought Sequent, responsible.
It is really a case about contracts.
(Need I say, I am not a lawyer.)
 
Old 06-27-2003, 11:13 PM   #10
tangle
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2002
Location: Arbovale, WV
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 1,761

Rep: Reputation: 78
I think that SCO is walking a tight rope. Most people that learn programing learn from the examples of other. So if there is a code in a script in a UNIX progam that reads "ls -l", then this line of code is the IP right of SCO.
 
Old 06-28-2003, 10:02 AM   #11
Flibble
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2002
Distribution: Redhat 9.0, Debian, Knoppix, YellowDog
Posts: 142

Rep: Reputation: 15
Good article about this here:

http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20030619.html

Flibble
 
Old 06-28-2003, 10:42 AM   #12
2damncommon
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Location: Calif, USA
Distribution: PCLINUXOS
Posts: 2,918

Rep: Reputation: 103Reputation: 103
Quote:
sco is a derivitive work of ....
That can't possibly be a good metaphor, whansard.
SCO is claiming their case is soild now.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
SCO vs Novell - SCO claims ownership to UNIX Ephracis General 5 10-02-2004 02:55 PM
SCO once again... stonehurstX11 General 5 03-05-2004 10:30 AM
SCO what a naughty SCO demmylls General 15 12-05-2003 09:19 AM
Coudn't open DVD device: /dev/dvd eboggess Linux - Laptop and Netbook 3 10-18-2003 06:02 PM
caldera, SCO, SCo group? qanopus General 7 08-25-2003 10:36 AM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - General

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:35 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration