On Sun, 2004-08-29 at 19:51, Kaj Haulrich wrote: > On Monday 30 August 2004 00:35, Richard Urwin wrote: > > Sorry if I jumped down your throat. I'm following this SCO et al > > debacle fairly closely, and you hit a trigger phrase. > > > > (as you know, Ken Brown, [probably bank-rolled by MS,] has > > accused Linus of copying MINIX when creating Linux. That would be > > an unlicensed use of MINIX and if it were true would call into > > question the legality of Linux.) > > Linus wrote wrote the first version of his code on Minix, yes. Does > that mean, that if someone writes a love-letter using Microsoft > Word that Bill and Steve have a date ? > > Does Remington own James Joyce's "Ulysses" because it was typed on a > Remington typewriter ? > > Does Gutenberg own the Bible ? > > Does the goose own the works of Shakespeare because it was written > with a feather ? > > And so on. > > Professor Tanenbaum - who wrote Minix - explicitely declared, that > there is NO Minix-code in Linux. Period.
Not only that Kaj but if memory serves me correctly I believe Tanenbaum explicitly gave Linus permission to use the code anyway. I came across a set of those emails when I was researching the legality issues surrounding the pwx.o hooks for phillips webcam. LX > > Kaj Haulrich.
____________________________________________________ Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com Join the Club : http://www.mandrakeclub.com ____________________________________________________
