I had sent an e-mail to a gentleman who had written an article on the SCO case, here is his reply -->Dear Mr Shilling, -->This is what SCO thinks about the BSD issue (quoting from the article) --> -->"But what about BSD?" I asked. Sontag responded that there "could be issues with the [BSD] settlement agreement," -->adding that Berkeley may not have lived up to all of its commitments under the settlement. -->"So you want royalties from FreeBSD as well?" I asked. Sontag responded that "there may or may not be issues. We -->believe that UNIX System V provided the basic building blocks for all subsequent computer operating systems, and that -->they all tend to be derived from UNIX System V (and therefore are claimed as SCO's intellectual property)." --> -->In other words, SCO feels its lawyers can challenge the AT&T-BSD settlement agreement and have it nullified. -->Sincerely, -->Trevor Gives this a ominous ring. If SCO can have that decade old case nullified, then they can claim ALL the original code in Unix! Even though they had nothing to do with it!
-----Original Message----- From: Jonathan Shilling Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 11:02 AM To: 'fmiller@lightlink.com'; Jonathan Shilling Cc: suse-linux-e Subject: RE: [SLE] GETTIN' MY MOJO BACK(OT)
Interesting thoughts, but I almost have to wonder, (know that AT&T had stolen code from FreeBSD) did SCO copy the code from Linux, rather than what they claim? I saw an interesting German article earlier today, where a man had said that he saw some of the "evidence" and though it is close, he could swear to it being "cut & pasted".
-----Original Message----- From: Fred A. Miller [mailto:fmiller@lightlink.com] Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 5:32 PM To: Jonathan Shilling Cc: suse-linux-e Subject: Re: [SLE] GETTIN' MY MOJO BACK(OT)
Fred,
I wonder if what AT&T is looking at is the code that they had stolen from FreeBSD back in the eighties. Could it be that that
code that SCO is crying, is actually from FreeBSD? If so, I wonder what that would do to their case, and how long would they last now that they have made SO many enemies? <BWEG>
P.S. Sorry about that, Fred, I did not mean to post
On Monday June 16 2003 5:19 pm, Jonathan Shilling wrote: particular "stolen" directly to you.
Yes...I know. Sometimes I forget to cc the list. This is the only list I'm on that is setup this way.
The 1 thing that keeps "popping up" in my mind, is why is SCO so steadfast insistant that they can "prove" the code theft, if they really don't have the evidence? They're now gone beyond the "point of no return," and must pursue a trial. Yet, IBM basically says, " So what? You can pull out ticket. Go soak your sorry heads in a bucket." Anders makes a good point, and for once I'd LIKE to disagree with him, but can't. IBM has some "dirty dealings" in their closet as well. They aren't Mr. Clean. The bottom line is, we just don't know who's telling the truth.
Fred
-- Planet Earth - a subsidiary of Microsoft®. We have no bugs in our software, Never!, We do have undocumented added features, that you will find amusing, at no added cost, to you, at this time.