On Sunday 15 Jun 2003 6:46 am, Stephen Kuhn wrote: > On Sat, 2003-06-14 at 15:29, Miark wrote: > > More like "boring" if you ask me. What peaked your interest? > > > > Miark > > It's actually quite interesting that The Open Group would state that all > of a sudden - they're wanting to maintain that UNIX is UNIX and they've > literally stated that IBM has a right to the source code as well as SCO > does...needless to say, the wraps are coming off the entire scenario as > it's being proven that SCO (and whatever software engineers) as the ones > that have written bits into linux code, instead of vice-versa...
They do not say anything about source code, or access to it. ] As the owner of the Unix trademark, The Open Group has separated the Unix ] trademark from any actual code stream itself, thus allowing multiple ] implementations." ] The simple fact is that throughout all of this, both SCO and IBM do have ] certified products. Each is licensed to use the Unix trademark in ] association with certified products with the correct attribution." The original press release: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,922913,00.asp says that the issue is source code related, not trademark related. ] The SCO filing said that IBM entered into its original Unix license ] agreements with AT&T Corp. in February 1985 to produce the AIX operating ] system. The agreements required that the Unix code be held in confidence and ] barred its unauthorized distribution or transfer. ] "IBM has been happily giving part of the AIX code away to the Linux ] community, but the problem is that they don't own the AIX code," McBride ] said. "It's a huge problem for us. We have been talking to IBM in this ] regard since early December and have reached an impasse. This was thus the ] only way forward for us." So TOG is saying nothing substative about the case. -- Richard Urwin
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
