4 Aug
2005
4 Aug
'05
15:53
Jerry Feldman wrote: > On Wednesday 03 August 2005 8:34 pm, John Scott wrote: >>If this holds up, and hopefully will, then SCO is dead at the end of >>this fiaSCO (maybe they should add the fia to the sign in Utah). We >>could start a fund, because they're going to be too poor to pay >>attention. Broke, busted, bankrupt, and out of business! > I've been following the SCO thing in Groklaw for quite a while and it > sometimes becomes quite amusing. It comes down to a few points: > 1. What did SCO (classic == Tarantella now part of Sun) get from Novell > initially. According to Novell, they didn't get the copyrights. > 2. Did IBM violate its contract terms WRT "derived works" when it > contributed NUMA, SMP, and JFS to Linux. (Note that this was not code that > SCO owned). The claims about JFS are curious, as it was developed for OS/2 and then ported to AIX & UNIX. They are apparently claiming derivative works, even though they never, according to AT&T, inherited that right. > 3. Other than the above 3 elements, is there any other code in Linux that > truly came directly from the AT&T code base. According to that note from the senior SCO software engineer, there was nothing that wasn't there legally i.e. from legitimate 3rd parties. > > One must remember, that Caldera (a Novell spinoff effectively started by Ray > Noorda) was a major Linux distro when they bought 1 division of SCO > (classic). SCO classic then changed its name to Tarantella, and Caldera > changed its name to the SCO Group.