Interesting, read this

If this is true, couldn't this mean that WE could sue them and THEY can't sue us?

The whole SCO thing is quite disturbing.
Apparently they (and Microsoft) have no problems ignoring the fact that they are hijacking somebody else's intellectual property while claiming to be protecting theirs. No matter how much Unix code someone may have snuck into the Linux kernel (if it is even true to begin with) it would in no way equal the work that all the honest contributers have put into the project.
I also find it disturbing that we really have to worry that a court could find that someone's right to hijack property that is not theirs "based on points of law (???)" could completely over ride our right to contribute freely to our society.
I really hope they get run out of town on a rail.

If this is true, we could and MUST sue them!(and if we do, we must give them enough hard evidences to crumble them )
If we don't, we will create a precendence that can lead up to a trial that we maybe can't win! (those MS boys wouldn't supprise at that).

We must fight back!

If it's true, what SCO is doing is illegal. I'm wondering if we have to sue at all. Cos isn't this like putting your own house on fire and claiming it is an accident and subsequently asking the insurance to pay up?