[TriLUG] SCO Conference Call
J. "Spydir Web" Powers
jppow at bellsouth.net
Tue Aug 5 19:01:28 EDT 2003
What I don't get is how did this code get in? The only logical thing I
could ever think of is that someone that works for SCO also wrote the
file/part of the file that SCO is saying uses their code. they were
sitting there one day and said "hey, I just wrote this code for this SCO
job and I could easily just reuse it to do this patch for this 2.4
code..." or something along those lines. Why doesn't SCO just go after
the guy that did this? They could quite easily figure it out I
think....which is why what Magnus said makes some sense to me...
Gnu Man wrote:
> That would be like cutting off the head to cure the headache.
> The root of the problem is IP (intellectual property). Open source
> needs a system to protect everyone that copyrighted code is not entered
> into their source trees.
> I'm afraid if this problem is not fixed, Open Source Software's future
> does not look very good.
> On Tue, 2003-08-05 at 17:12, Robertdkeys at aol.com wrote:
>>In a message dated 8/5/03 4:47:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
>>lovelace at wayfarer.org writes:
>><< Their plan is to offer a Licensing Scheme and sue everyone that doesn't
>> > purchase a license for a kernel 2.4 or later version of Linux. >>
>>OK, let's think logically. IFF 2.4 code and later is problematic, what is
>>last non-problematic code? Take that, diverge off, and leave SCO in a pile
>>I seem to recall this wheel spinning about 10 years back or thereabouts.
>>AT&T lost their shirt. BSD diverged off, and now look where it is. Seven
>>files were pulled out and rewritten. It took several months. Linux could
>>easily do the same thing, and leave SCO in the dust!
>>Food for thought.....
WARNING!!: SHAMELESS SELF PROMOTION BELOW!
Net Syndrome -- www.netsyndrome.net
Spydir Web MP3's -- www.mp3.com/SpydirWeb/
The Real Reason Mobile Phones Have Cameras -- www.mobileasses.com
More information about the TriLUG