[linux-elitists] It seems to me. . .
Karsten M. Self
Fri May 16 07:21:51 PDT 2003
on Fri, May 16, 2003 at 09:09:06AM -0400, Mark Stillwell (firstname.lastname@example.org) wrote:
> I doubt if SCO's actions before they decided to sue IBM will be able to
> be held against them. However, they did continue to distribute their
> version of linux (with kernel) for a while after they started the lawsuit.
> This would seem to be a violation of the GPL.
Please review the definitions of the following words and phrases:
- Bad faith negotiation.
- Reneging on contract.
- Corporate due dillegance.
SCO's case is IMO fatally harmed by its three years of distribution of
the works it claims embody trade secrets and copyrighted code. It may
have a complaint, in the specific instance of the latter, against the
individual or organizations responsible for submitting specific kernel
code. Not against the broader community or userbase.
IANAL, TINLA, YADA.
Karsten M. Self <email@example.com> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
Comic tragedy: MobiliX sued by comix publisher over iX trademark
More information about the linux-elitists