Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

USENIX Panel On SCO Lawsuit Now Available

Posted by timothy on from the sound-thrashing dept.

porkrind writes "No Starch Press and The USENIX Association co-sponsored a discussion on the SCO vs. IBM case at the USENIX Annual Technical Conference. Now you can listen as Chris DiBona, Don Marti, Jon "maddog" Hall, and others explain the nuances of the case. Click here for the MP3."

6 of 28 comments (clear)

  1. BitTorrent mirror of MP3 (~8mb) by mcgroarty · · Score: 3, Informative

    Should this thing get all slashdotted to hell, I've got a BitTorrent mirror of the MP3 available here.

  2. MP3 mirror by Laven · · Score: 3, Informative

    ftp://videl.ics.hawaii.edu/temp/usenix-slashdot/us enix.mp3
    Mirror of MP3 just in case of Slashdotting.

  3. I have by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Okay, not OG, just another AC.

    But yes, I've read all available documents and exhibits except for the NDA code specifically under scrutiny.

    From what I can tell SCO has quite a case if the NDA code can be proven to be illegally added to Linux. If not, then the whole case falls apart.

    Whoa. I just summarized that last 3 weeks of Slashdot in two sentences.

    1. Re:I have by Gaetano · · Score: 4, Informative

      80 lines of code makes quite a case? The NDA is to see 80 lines of code.

      Here is an essay from a person that signed the NDA. Here is a bit you may find interesting:

      Here is what I think I can say about the code I saw. The code is fairly trivial--the kind of stuff I wrote in school. The similar portions of the code were some 80 lines or so. Looking around the Net, I found close variants of the code, with the same comments and variable names, in sources other than Linux distributions. The code is not in a central part of the Linux kernel. The code does not appear to have been contributed to Linux by SCO or Caldera. The code exists in current versions of the Linux kernel.

      Doesn't sound like much of a case to me. Perhaps you mean if hundreds of thousands of lines of code, that would make it quite a case.

    2. Re:I have by hobit · · Score: 2, Informative

      The law prohibits verbatim copying of copyrighted materials.

      Not always. When working on a program and taking contributions from others the rule of thumb is that if it is less than 1 page don't worry about it too much. Fair use and the like protect you. It is like quoting from a book.

      Not saying 80 lines isn't enough for a court to rule infringment but the number of lines does matter.

      --
      As Nietsche famously said, "If you stare too long into the Abyss, 1d4 Tanar'ri of random type will attack you."
    3. Re:I have by schon · · Score: 3, Informative

      3) The code continues to exist, violating SCO's copyrights.

      Not quite.

      The alleged code continues to exist because SCO refuses to tell anyone where it is.

      Do some reading about the Doctrine of Laches. Basically, since SCO refuses to tell anyone where the alleged code is, then the alleged code is worthless to them. Since the code is worthless, SCO can't claim injury.

      That's why the first order of business in a copyright enforcement process is to tell the infringing party what it is they're doing wrong.

      By refusing to tell anyone where the alleged code is, so that it can be removed, they are essentially giving up any copyright claims they might have had.