On Wed, 2003-06-04 at 21:16, tanner at real-time.com wrote: > What can a lowly, linux user do to help fight this SCO thing? Best I can think > of is just keep moving forward, evangelizing linux. Since I know you guys do work evangelizing Linux, it's probably just important for you to be up-to-date on the issue. I don't know how often discussion of this case comes up with regard to potential Linux deployments, but I'm sure it happens at least once in a while. One bright point I can think of, and something that interested parties might want to do is follow the example of the Linuxtag group in Germany. They successfully got a judge to tell SCO to cease-and-desist pestering companies with threatening letters. Also, someone had a "SCO Sue Me!" page where Linux users could sign up to be sued by SCO, but I heard the guy running the page shut it down after something like 4000 people registered. The situation definitely irks me, so maybe I'll write a letter to the editor or contact some congresscritters. But, at the moment I'm fairly content to just watch and let the IBM lawyers do their thing. It's still *very* early in the legal game. I really doubt that SCO could win, especially against a company with a well-trained bank of lawyers like IBM. I haven't seen them say much yet, but maybe I just haven't been paying enough attention. I prefer to think that IBM is quietly building up a very big response.. Some interesting points (See the OSI position paper for a much more thorough discussion: http://catb.org/~esr/hackerlore/sco-vs-ibm.html) * SCO ownership of Unix intellectual property is questionable: - Novell might have the real ownership - Many Unix trade secrets may have already been legally nullified http://catb.org/~esr/nosecrets/ * Linux is "owned" by the Free Software Foundation, not IBM See the "COPYING" file in your source distribution * IBM is big on intellectual property, and (from what I can tell) they do what they can to keep exactly this sort of thing from happening - Comments from Linux developers at IBM indicate that IBM has a system in place for approving the inclusion of IP in Linux code. - IBM is highly experienced with "Chinese wall" development environments * SCO lied their ass off in the complaint - The company could probably be countersued on various points - Several technologies they claim were "stolen" don't exist in true Unix. - Caldera (predecessor to current SCO Group) contributed quite a bit to Linux, something they're very quiet about now If SCO's accusations have any merit, I'm sure most sane people would be happy with the Linux code in question being rewritten. However, SCO has been acting really strange, so it's hard to tell what weirdness they might come up with. If it ever gets to the point where SCO starts suing companies that use Linux, then it would be time to re-evaluate your position. Still, I doubt SCO has the resources to sue more than a relative handful of companies. -- _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ ___ _ _ __ When everything is coming / \/ \(_)| ' // ._\ / - \(_)/ ./| ' /(__ your way, you're in the \_||_/|_||_|_\\___/ \_-_/|_|\__\|_|_\ __) wrong lane. [ Mike Hicks | http://umn.edu/~hick0088/ | mailto:hick0088 at tc.umn.edu ] -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://shadowknight.real-time.com/pipermail/tclug-list/attachments/20030604/0464ae99/attachment.pgp