HP Clarifies Indemnification Offer For Linux Users

After HP extended an offer of indemnification to users who purchase Linux through HP, SCO issued a strange press release: in it, SCO claims that HP's action actually supports SCO's claims that "issues exist" with the Linux kernel's legal status. In an article at NewsForge (like Slashdot, part of OSDN), HP's Martin Fink roundly denies SCO's backhanded interpretation; a followup story quotes Bruce Perens, Linus Torvalds and ESR on the HP offer. Linus: "Indemnification is wonderful. It might be a cynical marketing tactic, but if people are asking for it, why not?" The first article also points out the limited nature of HP's indemnification claims, which are definitely not blanket protection -- installing patches not approved by HP could well make them wash their hands of your machine.

Comments

Without copyright, Linux users fine.

[Thinkit3]

Abolish copyright, and HP would have no need to do this. Without copyright, SCO's case against Linux users completely dries up. There may be a contract dispute, but that would only be between IBM and SCO. Actual linux users, who signed no contract, would be fine.

Re:Errr... okay...

[skajake]

This looks like the same logic as: "We haven't found any WMD's in Iraq. This proves that they are hiding them".

Hmmm, it is good logic when you consider that WMD did infact exist and were documented by not only the UN SC but other international human rights groups. Check here for an unbiased documentation of Iraq's former WMD program.

Re:Errr... okay...

[jmv]

Of course, it explains why there's still no trace of them 6 months after the war. I think the worst one I heard was (I think from GWB, but not sure) along: "we didn't find any WMD's because nasty Saddam destroyed them before we attacked" (isn't it what you asked for).