SCO Drops Linux, Says Current Vendors May Be Liable

Hank Scorpio writes "Well, SCO is at it again. I just received an email from their Developer Partner Program stating that not only are they suspending all future sales of their own Linux product (due to the alleged intellectual property violations), but they are also beginning to send out this letter to all existing commercial users of Linux, informing them that they may be liable for using Linux, a supposed infringing product. They mentioned that they will begin using tactics like those of the RIAA in taking action against end-users of Linux. This seems like it will be about as successful as the whole GIF ordeal a few years back. Where is UNISYS today? Is SCO litigating itself into irrelevance?"

Comments

Time to switch to FreeBSD (or other BSD's)

[dokebi]

Ok, I'm not trolling. Hear me out:
SCO is claming Linux contains AT&T code. GNU/linux always claimed that they never had AT&T code, and thus not liable. But it has to go through the courts to be proved (taking time and money), which is what SCO is counting on. Meanwhile, FreeBSD has already gone through this process in the early ninety's, the outcome of which is that *all* AT&T code was removed from BSD (resulting in BSD-lite), and that noone could sue anyone using this code. Long live free software.

From the recent OSnews interview http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=3415&page= 8
In any event, those files with USL copyrights on them have specific permission to be distributed by the Regents of the University of California to settle thse lawsuits, with an additional agreement that Novel (and its successors) would not sue anybody using systems on 4.4lite.