ok...I'm a little behind. Haven't been in my email for
a while.
I have a question: How long has Linux been around as
such?
Now, is the allegation that Linux is a RESULT of
"stolen code", or that Linux has (after inception)
been DEVELOPED with "stolen code"?
What I'm getting at is this (and I'm by no means an
expert in any kind of law):
There is a Statute of Limitations on nearly every kind
of legal action. If SCO chose not to act on this for
so long, don't they forfeit the right to bring legal
action now? And, since they've been in this market a
while, surely they knew.
As for who actually "owns" the code in Linux, doesn't
it default to whoever is in posession of it after a
period of time (kind of a "squatter's rights"), since
SCO has known it was there all along and chose not to
do anything about it before now?
--- "Ian C. Blenke" <icblenke@nks.net> wrote:
> On Thursday 15 May 2003 11:43, Derek Glidden wrote:
> > On Thu, 2003-05-15 at 08:42, marrandy wrote:
> > > SCO at it again.
> > >
> > >
>
http://www.sco.com/scosource/letter_to_linux_customers.html
> >
> > And an excellent analysis and debunking of SCO's
> claims:
> >
> > http://www.opensource.org/sco-vs-ibm.html
> >
> > Unfortunately, ESR bogs down at the end with
> philosophical rambling that
> > kind of muddies the whole thing. Just stop before
> the very end about
> > "who owns UNIX."
>
> There are some historical bits in there that
> conflict with what I've read as
> well. Sifting through the true history from the
> rumor or confusion is
> difficult.
>
> Still, ESR hits on the major points. I particularly
> like the reference to #27,
> whereby SCO was actually distributing the very thing
> they are contesting.
>
> --
> - Ian C. Blenke <icblenke@nks.net>
>
> (This message bound by the following:
> http://www.nks.net/email_disclaimer.html)
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 20:10:19 EDT