[linux-elitists] We've seen SCO's evidence

Jonathan Corbet corbet-elite@lwn.net
Thu Aug 21 07:04:20 PDT 2003

Sontag quote of the day:

	In response, Chris Sontag, SCO's senior vice president and general
	manager of SCO Source, told TechNewsWorld that the company has now
	unveiled the offending code and that it can be remedied.  "The vast
	majority of the code [in violation] is the derivative work from
	IBM, so that's a great place to start," Sontag stated. "We're
	talking about more than one million lines of code that can be

	-- http://www.ecommercetimes.com/perl/story/31386.html

So, assuming Chris doesn't change his story by the end of the day, there
shouldn't be too many more surprises coming from that direction.  Now that
the "direct copying" argument has been pretty well shot down (though SCO
doesn't yet see it that way, see below), we're left with the original IBM
breach of contract dispute.

They really *don't* have massive piles of code that they will even try to
claim were directly copied.

On the ate_utils thing, the latest word from Blake is that, while he
acknowledges the ancient Unix release (an important thing), the claim is
that the code in question still came from SYSV.  Might there be a SYSV
version with a closer match on function names and such?  Would that matter?


More information about the linux-elitists mailing list