Slashdot Mirror

You dont think coca-cola would be upset if a product came out called coka-cola

These meters weren't branded with a name similar to Fluke, so that's not a good analogy.

in a red and white can?

There are already competitors to Coke that sell in red and white cans:

http://www.colawp.com/database...

I need the jolt.

Mmm... Jolt

How about this one?

Vanilla Crack.

But which BSD can be cracked most easily?

You can already have Open Cola. It's GPL'ed, so if you buy a bottle from a local retailer, be sure to ask for the source code. :))

> One thing I've always wanted to do... is to develop a fairly decent homebrew recipe and release it under the GPL.

Like this cola recipe?

Hey! What about OpenCola?

For anyone that is interested in the idea like I am there is a guide here. (It's a badly laid out, partially Japanese page with an English article though)

How fast the kernel developers could render their code irrellevant would not change the value of the code because SCO could reasonably argue that the kernel developers were highly motivated to quickly change it on account of the lawsuit, not because SCO's code itself was next to worthless.

[Bugs Bunny voice]Hold on a minute there, Pocahontas![/Bugs Bunny voice] If SCO's legal grievance is solely based on trade secrets, two things come into play. Firstly, a trade secret, once revealed, is not a secret anymore. People who use that knowlege are immune to suit. However, the person who reveals a secret is liable for their action and may be disciplined by the company they work for if that company is the one whose secrets they are revealing, and sued if they have signed a contract (which anyone getting access to trade secrets does nowadays). (As many posters have pointed out, the person who reveals the recipe for Coke has to answer to the Coca Cola Company, but no one else need worry about it).

Under no circumstances would the revelation of a trade secret in the code of Linux affect Linux itself or its users and distributors any more than the users and distributors of OpenCola would have to "answer to the Coca Cola Company."

> Thats because Coke is not open source. Isn't the ability to modify an inherent feature in open source software ?

This is Slashdot. We are using Linux, not Windows, and we are drinking OpenCola, not Coke. Did I miss a memo or something? Is OSS not "elite" now, or what?

You'd better not try to use Pepsi points to buy that Harrier.