[linux-elitists] [mds@hsmds2.prnewswire.com: SCO Suspends Distribution of Linux Pending Intellectual Property...]

Ben Woodard woodard@redhat.com
Thu May 15 11:48:35 PDT 2003


Don,

How can they prove legally that one piece of source code was taken from
another? i.e. How can they prove that it isn't convergent evolution #1
and that the code didn't migrate the other way?

-ben

On Wed, 2003-05-14 at 19:35, Don Marti wrote:
> Played a little guessing game with Chris Sontag today regarding
> the alleged code copied from UnixWare.  Yes, he's willing to say
> more than the "intellectual property" folderol and finally claim
> straightforwardly there's deliberately obfuscated UnixWare source
> in Linux.  The kernel.  The official kernel.  Like on kernel.org.
> (I was very sure to pin him down on that.)
> 
> There is "signficant copyrighted and trade secret code within Linux".
> 
> "It's all over the place".
> 
> No answers regarding which subsystems have it, or dates it got there.
> Or which contributors were associated with it.
> 
> He does say that alleded infringing code got into the kernel both before
> and after IBM began contributing, but won't give me a date when the
> alleged copying started.
> 
> Is it just that both Linux and UnixWare are borrowing from BSD?
> 
> "We specifically excluded the BSD-derived code."
> 
> He made a big deal about SCO's profitability, probably to keep me
> from using the "doomed company spends last dollar on lottery ticket"
> angle which others have already beat to death and I wasn't going to
> use anyway.  Anyway, a story on this -- with a better angle -- should
> be on the linuxjournal.com site soon, if the cron daemon cooperates.
> 
> If half of what Sontag says is right, there are kernel developers
> perpetrating not just copyright infringement, but academic
> dishonesty and plagiarism.  
> 
> <ianal>If Sontag is lying, the kernel developers have a good basis
> for a libel suit.</ianal>




More information about the linux-elitists mailing list