[ Date Index ][
Thread Index ]
[ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Ray Smith wrote: > > Qustion is : If I WERE to take any notice of this I wouldn't - see the discussions in u.c.o.l for various explanations. Basically SCO have distributed the code under the GPL, and have not ceased to distribute since they realised their mistake, so their legal position is probably non-existent. Since they haven't attempted to mitigate their losses by revealing which code is infringing* to the maintainers of the kernel it is almost certain they can't act successfully in either the US, Britain or similar legal regimes, against infringers (since we have no way to know if we are infringing, and since they have failed to reveal they have failed to demonstrate a desire to stop infringements). Probably the only shrewd move was to offload SCO stock when it reached double figures, like various senior executives at SCO did. > and use say, mandrake > 7.2, how easy, if indeed possible would it be to upgrade to kde 3 or gnome 2 > and if not what would be he highest version I could upgrade to without using > a 2.4 kernel ? I'm not aware of much (any?) dependency of such applications on the kernel, hell Debian should soon have the option to use other kernels (BSD, Hurd), so 2.2 to 2.4 should be a minor issue. But why bother worrying till SCO act against you as an infringer, when you can ask for details of the infringing code under UK law and the community will replace it. I mean there may be Eighth Layer copyrighted code in the Linux kernel (unlikely), IBM code, SUN code, HP code, Alan Cox code, all of whom might suddenly start claiming you need insurance against them actually revealing what the infringing code actually is. As such the action is clearly nonsense until they put up the code, and let the kernel maintainers audit the origins of the offending code. I suspect there is a high probability that at least some of the duplicate code has gone from Linux to Unix, as the Linux code base is much more widely available to plagarise. It which point Linus can sue for infringement, and under US law claim a substantial proportion of the revenue generated by sales of such code. Of course whether we'll ever establish this, depends how carefully SCO have checked the origins of the code they are eventually forced to release. Simon * Since the infringing code is freely available there is no need for non-disclosure agreements before the offending code can be revealed as far as I can see. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQE/NWWQGFXfHI9FVgYRArtPAJ4rxnC/7IO8kpcxM4gP7wsagYFhVgCgjW/2 WIEo/oRAaI7W+yC26gKeX/4= =UuSe -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG Mail majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe list" in the message body to unsubscribe.