On Thursday 04 August 2005 10:46 am, James Knott wrote:
AT&T had at one point clarified what was referred to by derivative rights. According to what I read, they meant it to refer only to actual AT&T code included in the software and specifically excluded the other code, written by the licencee. So in the case of JFS, if IBM had included Unix code, then the rights would apply only to that code and not JFS as a whole, as SCO claimed. In the case of JFS, NUMA and SMP, these were all contributed to Linux, and did not include any Unix code. There was a lot of depositions from various AT&T (current and former) employees as well as IBM on this.
The bottom line is that Darl McBride and company are not only ruining the
former Caldera, but doing their best to hurt the entire Unix/Linux
marketplace, which might be their objective.
--
Jerry Feldman