Yes, that goes back to an old court case. BSD when it was taken to court many years ago was split into the Open BSD flavor and the 'proprietary' code. The open code could be copied, modified and used by others. That was some of the SCO court fiasco. They claimed that code was theirs and they owned it. It was an interesting bit of stupidity that SCO tried to push down our throats. Novell ended up with some of the material after the earlier case was decided. There is a long list of how things became convoluted, misunderstood, and how SCO tried to claim ownership archived at groklaw.com.
I can give you a very general stock tip. I would not recommend SCO stock (even under another name) to anyone now :-). Dave On Wed, 2011-02-16 at 15:24 -0600, Dagmar d'Surreal wrote: > On Tue, 2011-02-15 at 21:59 -0600, andrew mcelroy wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 9:54 PM, David R. Wilson <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > Yup. Stole if fair and square. Just go ask the SCO guys > > about it :-). > > > > I think novell had something to say about that > > No, I really do mean it's based on the same stuff. I vaguely remember > at one point seeing a ML discussion where someone was pooh-poohing some > of the Linux code in favor of their BSD box and had a kernel dev come > down on them to the effect of "They're the same code, you fool--it was > ported into Linux". > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "NLUG" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nlug-talk?hl=en
