Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

What if SCO is Right?

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the stuff-to-think-about dept.

b17bmbr writes " What if SCO is right. Bruce Perens was quoted with this scenario. "it's entirely possible that SCO was inadvertently distributing its own proprietary Unix code in its version of Linux. In that case, SCO would've already released its Unix source code into open source". But here's the catch: Does this validate Microsoft's view of a "viral GPL"?"

2 of 571 comments (clear)

  1. Here's what SUSE is saying on their web site. by ScottGant · · Score: 5, Informative



    Go to their website
    and see for yourself. Doesn't look like SCO even talked to them about
    this yet...at least that's what SUSE is claiming:

    SuSE responds to
    latest SCO actions

    The UnitedLinux code base -- jointly
    designed and developed by SuSE Linux, Turbolinux, Conectiva and SCO --
    will continue to be supported unconditionally by SuSE Linux. We will
    honor all UnitedLinux commitments to customers and partners, regardless
    of any actions that SCO may take or even allegations they may make.

    SCO's actions are again indeed
    curious. We have asked SCO for clarification of their public
    statements, SCO has declined. We are not aware, nor has SCO made any
    attempt to make us aware, of any specific unauthorized code in any SuSE
    Linux product. As a matter of policy, we have diligent processes for
    ensuring that appropriate licensing arrangements (open source or
    otherwise) are in place for all code used in our products.

    --

    "Music is everybody's possession. It's only publishers who think that people own it." - John Lennon.
  2. Re:Yes it would hurt their case by davebo · · Score: 5, Informative

    Ah, but during the discovery phase of a case, you are REQUIRED to tell the opposing side what evidence you have, what witnesses you will be calling, what you consider to be relevant case law and your take on it.

    You don't "surprise" either side with evidence in a real court of law. Judges won't let you present evidence in court you haven't already shared with the opposition during discovery, unless it really is "brand new" evidence discovered after the trial has started. And if that actually happens, you'll often have a recess declared so the opposition has a chance to analyze the evidence.

    So they lose nothing by presenting the relevant IP.