[linux-elitists] [firstname.lastname@example.org: SCO Suspends Distribution of Linux Pending Intellectual Property...]
Thu May 15 09:59:34 PDT 2003
>>>>> "DM" == Don Marti <email@example.com> writes:
DM> Played a little guessing game with Chris Sontag today
DM> regarding the alleged code copied from UnixWare. Yes, he's
DM> willing to say more than the "intellectual property" folderol
DM> and finally claim straightforwardly there's deliberately
DM> obfuscated UnixWare source in Linux. The kernel. The
DM> official kernel. Like on kernel.org. (I was very sure to pin
DM> him down on that.)
DM> There is "signficant copyrighted and trade secret code within
DM> "It's all over the place".
So, does "deliberately obfuscated" code mean that somebody just took
an idea and rewrote it? Or does it just mean they ran it through
something like this:
The GNU standards doc says this about having seen Unix code of any
"If you have a vague recollection of the internals of a Unix
program, this does not absolutely mean you can't write an
imitation of it, but do try to organize the imitation
internally along different lines, because this is likely to
make the details of the Unix version irrelevant and dissimilar
to your results."
Is this the type of thing SCO is talking about? Interfaces and
mechanisms in Linux or GNU that _work_ like Unix, but were written in
a different way ("deliberately obfuscated")?
I think it would be fair to state that in some ways GNU/Linux works
like Unix. But is that actionable? Isn't it really just a
look-and-feel problem at the kernel interface level?
Also, I'm wondering: are any Linux vendors filing against SCO for
their FUD letter?
P.S. I forget... is there any forth in the Linux kernel?
X-Quote: "I may not have class, but I have style." -- Miss Conduct
More information about the linux-elitists