hmmmm..... I could have swore that the courts had decided that too much of the code in Unix could be attributed to others, and that very little remained of what AT&T had originally developed, but I could very well be wrong. I also thought that Berkly had started a counter suit and AT&T had settled out of court. Anyone else remember any of this, or am I just nuts? :) -- Jonathan
> -----Original Message----- > From: Benjamin Jeeves [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 7:59 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [newbie] ARTICLE: The SCO UNIX Lawsuit (from > Windows & .NET > M agazine) > > > I think it was AT&T who try Berkley and win and developer had > to change about > 10 lines of code so thing like that. > > On Wednesday 11 Jun 2003 1:47 pm, Jonathan Shilling wrote: > > Interesting to note that SCO states the code stolen is from > sys V. If I > > rememeber correctly system V could only run on a single > processor system, > > and that much of its code was stolen from Berkley and > FreeBSD. Anyone else > > care to look back to the case where one of the previous > owners of the Unix > > source tried to sue Berkley and lost? > > > > Jonathan > > -- Linux user since Red Hat ver 1.0 > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Stephen Kuhn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 3:48 PM > > > To: Mandrake Newbie > > > Subject: [newbie] ARTICLE: The SCO UNIX Lawsuit (from > Windows & .NET > > > Magazine) > > > > > > > > > ==== 1. Commentary: The SCO UNIX Lawsuit--Will It Affect Your > > > Business? > > > by Paul Thurrott, News Editor, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > Most Windows-based enterprises are likely well versed > in the Linux > > > debate in which Linux supporters argue that their > favorite OS is more > > > secure and less expensive than Windows because it's > created largely by > > > volunteers, is developed in the open and available for source-code > > > examination, and is free to license. But many companies > I've spoken to > > > are less susceptible to the religious dogma behind Linux > and take a > > > more practical approach to implementing the open-source > solution, as > > > they do with any other technology. That is, most mid- and > large-sized > > > businesses are heterogeneous, implementing technology > where it makes > > > the most sense, which today, often means small and > midsized Web sites, > > > file servers, and in some cases even 3-D graphics-rendering farms. > > > Linux has proven to be a fairly versatile and inexpensive > alternative > > > to Windows server products, even when you factor in the cost of > > > supporting a UNIX-like environment. Over the years, I've found the > > > steady improvements to Linux to be somewhat hard to swallow. > > > Apparently I'm not the only one who thinks that way. > UNIX patent, > > > copyright, and intellectual property owner SCO Group recently sued > > > IBM, the largest Linux licensee, for $1 billion, charging > the computer > > > giant with stealing copyrighted UNIX code and using it in Linux. > > > Furthermore, SCO charges that any company using Linux faces legal > > > action over intellectual property rights because of the fact that > > > crackers have stolen entire sections of UNIX code and > placed that code > > > in Linux. The legal battle, which Linux backers initially > greeted with > > > somewhat childish dissent, is starting to heat up. And if > IBM doesn't > > > respond adequately this week, SCO says it will cancel IBM's UNIX > > > license, a legal bomb that could force IBM to stop selling its > > > UNIX-based AIX software. > > > SCO's claims aren't without merit. After a weak > rebuttal over the > > > status of UNIX's copyrights from former UNIX owner Novell > earlier this > > > month, SCO produced documents that prove SCO has "all > rights to UNIX > > > ... technology, including the copyrights," an assertion Novell > > > ultimately supported. However, Novell still maintains it > owns certain > > > patents related to UNIX, a fact that's unlikely to > inhibit SCO from > > > suing every Linux-using company on the planet. The > problem, of course, > > > comes down to the source code. > > > According to SCO, you can compare the UNIX System V and Linux > > > source code to see where Linux is stealing wholeheartedly > from UNIX. > > > To make this comparison, however, you have to sign an egregious > > > nondisclosure agreement (NDA), which prevents you from discussing > > > details of the charges. This NDA is causing many members > of the press > > > to decline the invitation. Laura Dido of the Yankee Group > signed the > > > NDA, and she says the evidence is damning, with entire sections of > > > source code, including original developer documentary > notes, lifted > > > wholesale from the UNIX System V source code. Based on > this evidence, > > > she recommended that companies with AIX contracts contact IBM > > > immediately for advice. A wider concern is whether this > development > > > will forever taint or curtail adoption of the open-source > phenomenon. > > > As with Microsoft's sudden domination of the Web > browser market, > > > critics have looked at Linux's sharp adoption and technical > > > improvement rates with some distrust. How can an OS > without any true > > > central management or development strategy so quickly > grow to rival > > > and even eclipse the decades-old UNIX? Well, theft is one > obvious way. > > > As a hypothetical argument, let's say Linux's original > threading code > > > prevented it from scaling past a certain point. One way to improve > > > that limitation would be to steal code from a similar > OS--UNIX--that > > > had already solved the scaling problem. But the question > remains: Who > > > stole the UNIX code? > > > This question might ultimately be answered in court, > and although > > > SCO has been silent about various details surrounding its > claims, the > > > company has said that it doesn't believe IBM is directly > responsible > > > for the theft. But what was once a curious, if nervously humorous > > > lawsuit, is suddenly gaining steam. If SCO can revoke IBM's AIX > > > license and prove that IBM used UNIX code in Linux, a > wholesale attack > > > on Linux companies could be next. And few of these companies are > > > backed by the kind of legal resources IBM commands. If IBM falls, > > > these other companies are in trouble. > > > The situation also has a couple of wild cards, as you > might expect. > > > The first is Microsoft, which recently made a huge media > event out of > > > licensing the UNIX code from SCO and recommending that > other companies > > > do the same. At the time, Microsoft said it was licensing > the source > > > code to provide better interoperability between UNIX and > its products > > > (notably Windows Services for UNIX--SFU). But where > Microsoft goes, > > > charges of fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD) follow. The Linux > > > community immediately cried foul at the Microsoft media event, > > > charging that the software giant was trying to throw > another wrench > > > into the cogs of Linux's progress. Microsoft, however, said that > > > although Linux is indeed a threat, it has yet to feel the > pinch from > > > Linux, which the company says has stolen market share > from UNIX not > > > Windows. > > > Second, SCO is clearly using litigation as a revenue > stream. The > > > company doesn't have a balanced portfolio of products and > services, > > > and it doesn't take a financial genius to realize that > someone at the > > > company eventually decided that its only valuable asset was its > > > ownership of the slowly fading UNIX. If SCO's suit against IBM is > > > successful--meaning, the company makes oodles of money in an > > > out-of-court settlement or by ultimately winning the case--we can > > > expect SCO to move on down the UNIX and Linux food chains, suing > > > companies that work on or use these technologies. The > ramifications > > > are staggering. > > > Is this legal threat something companies implementing > AIX or Linux > > > need to worry about, or will the SCO lawsuit disappear > behind smoke > > > and mirrors? Let me know what you think, and whether you > believe your > > > company--or the wider AIX and Linux communities--have > anything to fear > > > from SCO. > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > ...ya reckon the writer is a bit slanted? > > > -- > > > Wed Jun 11 06:45:01 EST 2003 > > > 06:45:01 up 3 days, 16:36, 5 users, load average: > 0.10, 0.17, 0.13 > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > | __ __ |kuhn media australia | > > > | /-oo /| |'-. |http://kma.0catch.com | > > > | .\__/ || | | |================================| > > > | _ / `._ \|_|_.-' |stephen kuhn | > > > | > > > | | / \__.`=._) (_ | email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | > > > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > > linux user #:267497 linux machine #:194239 * MDK 9.1 & RH 7.3 > > > Mandrake Linux Kernel 2.4.21-11mdk Cooker for i586 > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > > * This message was composed on a 100% Microsoft free computer * > > > > > > Tobacco is a filthy weed, > > > That from the devil does proceed; > > > It drains your purse, it burns your clothes, > > > And makes a chimney of your nose. > > > -- B. Waterhouse > > >
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
