SCO is suing IBM for breach of contract and misappropriation of "trade secrets" - specifically - SCO says that IBM used concepts originally employed in SYSV unix to develop technologies for their own AIX Unix - SCO asserts that IBM breached its contract by inserting these technologies in their own Linux products and hence GPL'ing them - eventually some of these technologies were incorporated into the Linux kernel.

SCO seems to sign up to the perverse view that just because it holds the liscence to a Unix code lineage, it also has control over the concepts that underly it - further - it then says it has control over any derivative works based on "its" concepts.

This is surely disengenuous in the extreme and shows little respect for the many gifted programmers who have contributed Freely to the development of Unix over the last 30 years.

That's great to know. Although I do firmly believe IBM have not done any wrongdoing in regards to the UNIX-AIX-Linux battle, I feel relieved to know that there is no way in hell SCO could get me in trouble.

daihard
Think of it this way. If I buy a program that is on the shelve at Wal-Mart and the code in that program had been copied illeagly. Would I be liable for legal action? No! And Wal-Mart would not be liable either.

And so no Linux user needs to buy a License from SCO just because they are threatening us. Even if IBM put UNIX code in the Linux kernel (which I'm sure did not happen) I am no liable for what IBM did!

It is all SCARE TACTICS!

It works too, Just look at how their stock has jumped up.

I'm really concerned here. I'm sure IBM hasn't done any thing, but think about the effect this has on would be linux users, and corporate linux users. It's easy to imagin the will be scared away from linux. This is very bad news for commercial linux vendors like red hat. God forbit if a company like red hat, who gives an enormes impuls in the development of the OS, dies, it will be very big blow to linux.
I'm not concerd that they (SCO) might be right, but that there scare campaign might work.

Hi Shatoor

This is one of the primary dangers - What right did SCO have in sending out those 1500 letters to companies around the globe.

SCO holds the liscence to a certain Unix code lineage - NOT - to the Concepts that underly it.

Concepts are used and reused all the time - I use the if-then toy structure regularly - this sturcture must have crystallised in somebodies mind in the past - Am I plagiarising their work - No - the "concept" has been out in the public domain without a patent since the year dot.

Likewise - many of the concepts that IBM used were already out there in the public domain in various Unix lineages - lineages that SCO does'nt and didnt hold the liscence to.

You don't have to convince me. I know. SCO has a snowballs change in hell to win this case. But that's beside the point.
This FUD could be pretty damaging to linux. And the longer this goes on, the more harmfull this is. It's beside the point that we are right. In the corprate world, rumers and make or brake an company. It's all about the scare. And frakelly, that scare me.
I'm wondering, can SCO really get end users? I don't think so. So coulden't commerical linux vendors sue SCO, on the grounds that SCO has scared off custumers from the vendors with an inaccuarate claim?

It almost seems like a debate over plagerism.... "Is it public knowledge or isn't it." In a post that I read earlier I don't believe that an end user of Linux is liable. I personally have baought Red Hat, Suse, Mandrake and a few others from Best Buy and other stores like that and I have also registered those copies with their respective companies. I cannot and will not believe that there can be any legal recourse from this GREEDY ENTITY (SCO)! I have also used copies of various Linux OSs and everything I have read and been taught in university says that I can legally use these OSs and am protected because of the GPL. I also think that brings up a greater issue, will the GPL just stand by the way side or are they going to mount a counter suit! Will Novell, Red Hat, Suse, Mandrake and all the others anti up with IBM and mount a fight against this zellist one eyed monster (sorry trickykid)!?! I surely hope that people from these companies are reading these posts!

IBM is mentionned a lot as people HOPE it will become a savior to the linux community...but it bothers me that no big company is stepping up to slap SCO on this...none. We hear very little from IBM and a bit more from RedHat and various other linux talking heads but why isn't a big corp stepping up to the plate and threatening SCO right back?

That's what I'd like...FORCE them to put up or shut up...but no one is doing that like they did in Germany.

Shatoor
Its doubtful that SCO will have a chance of getting end users. SCO essentially wants to get companies to pay royalties if they sell products containing technologies such as:

RU, LVM, JFS, SMP, and NUMA

SCO says it has derivative rights on these technologies.

I disagree - I understand the difference between Code, Concepts, and the use of Concepts in derivative works - SCO obviously doesn't.

Regards Linux vendors - I agree - somebody should counter-sue SCO for dammaging their business interests with press releases about suposed copyright violation - copyright violation that has never been verified

It a perverse situation when SCO can simultaneously damage the business interests of Linux vendors while also enforcing NDA's on the viewing of supposed lifted code.

SCO should put up - or shut up.

I will never pay for a SCO license
 

That's it. I am :mad:

Eventhough Sco has no chance of winning there case. :tisk:
This is terrible for all things Linux. :(

I have been working on plans to convert a Windows network to a Linux network.
But, ever since the Sco vs Linux crap, the company has put everything on hold. :eek:

Eventhough I live in Canada, not even the border can isolate me from this Bullsh*t. :rolleyes:

I had them all pumped up and ready to go. :cry:

F@!%$*! %!$* :mad: