-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 scsijon wrote: | | | Actually, when you think about it, the GPL ruling would have to go a lot | higher than just the USA's Appellate Court, I would think it would have | at least go to the UN Courts even for a basic single judge 'maybe worth | hearing by a full bench' ruling, and the ruling I believe would take at | least six years on the flow lines of their present case calender. | <snip> | | But even then (with a negative UN Ruling), as Linux exists and has been | spread into countries that don't recognize the UN's legal domain it | would have also to be individually processed through the courts to | completion in each of those other legal domains as well, to get world | recognition as an action of the GPL being ruled illegal. | This is important here, as the US constitution states the sepreme court is the highest | I also believe that it would be SCO's responsability to prove the GPL is | illegal, not the Linux community to prove it is legal! | it is at least in the US courts. innocent until proven guilty Joe - -- SuSE Linux 8.1 (i386) Kernal: 2.4.19-4GB / i686 | Posted from: Miverna ~ 6:28pm up 8 days, 6:09, 4 users, load average: 0.22, 0.23, 0.19 nqs@tmcom.com | http://tigger.tmcom.com/~nqs/blogger.html -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQE+yYaKoS1S7SxfpzwRAokDAJ0axKAptydpxjnGokkwhVmUIu6YgQCgmxvc 7joUphM1oF+mqYB25UqF/ws= =QEWL -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----