Slashdot Mirror


Unsealed SCO Email Reveals Linux Code is Clean

rm69990 writes "In a recently unsealed email in the SCO vs. IBM case, it appears that an outside consultant, hired by SCO in 2002, failed to find copyright violations in the Linux Kernel. This was right around the time Darl McBride, who has before been hired by litigious companies as CEO, was hired. It appears that before SCO even began its investigation, they were hoping to find a smoking gun, not believing that Linux could possibly not contain Unix code. Apparently, they ignored the advice of this consultant."

13 of 733 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Reveals Darl McBride is Dirty by empaler · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Clinton denied allegations relating to his personal relations to another person. Noone was really hurt by his attempt to cover up his adultery.

    The others do not lie about something deeply personal. More precisely, they don't in the used examples.

    Bush made speeches about the importance of education while US bombs rained on schools in eastern Europe.

  2. OT by ScytheBlade1 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I'm quite sure that if you ask BYU they'll tell you that mormons are not related to the catholic church.

  3. Re:Apex of Values? Hah. by ak3ldama · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    They are very different in many ways, included basic theological background. Check it out: Wikipedia of Mormon To put it basically, none of the other churches have taken as their basic book of foundational beliefs from books not in the Bible. Even the Roman Catholic church chose to include the Apocrypha but not as a source of foundational truth. Because of this they are never grouped with other churches of Christianity.

    --
    "but money is the God of Algiers & Mahomet their prophet." - Rich. O'Bryen June 8th 1786
  4. Re:Reveals Darl McBride is Dirty by Arker · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Clinton lied about a lot of stuff, the particular one you're talking about, was in an attempt to evade a lawsuit he was facing over a pattern of sexual harrassment and rape he engaged in for years - so I'd hardly say it was harmless.

    Beyond that, of course, he harmed people by setting a bad example, which was exactly the point being made. Silly as it is, when the President lies a lot of people start thinking lying is ok.

    The fact that Bush gets away with lying even more, and killing even more, than Clinton did, doesn't absolve Clinton. Neither do Clintons misdeeds excuse Bushes. But the point, again, is the effect on the broader society when people in high places engage in such shameful, but shameless, dishonesties... and get away with it over and over.

    --
    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
  5. Re:LINUX IS SHIT by RickPartin · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    You're not very good at the whole trolling thing are you? Your comment is so dumb I don't see anyone getting mad. You have failed.

  6. lies? by Scrameustache · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    That's right.. like "I did not have sexual relations with that woman"

    A chick offers you a blow job.
    You do not say no.

    Someone acuses you of having forced her to have full intercourse with you. What do ou say when they ask you if you did it? You say "no", even if they made the question vague enough to include both what actually happened and what they're accusing you of doing.

    And now: How many lives did Clinton's blowjob cost?
    Because Bush's war killed 23 thousand Iraqi civilian lives, and now nearly 2 thousand US troops their lives.

    --

    You can't take the sky from me...

  7. Re:Reveals Darl McBride is Dirty by AvitarX · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    And in recent days, the Financial Times has reported that illicit sales of uranium from Niger were indeed being negotiated with Iraq, as well as with four other states.

    wouldn't that be a case agains Niger and not Iraq. I do see how this helps make a case that Iraq was not the serious enemy though.

    --
    Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  8. Re:LINUX IS SHIT by MyLongNickName · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    You replied to it. Therefore, the troll did its job.

    --
    See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
  9. Re:Hot Karl + Dirty Sanchez = Saddamy by mankey+wanker · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Doc is right.

    I am 100% more concerned about homeland security than I am about securing our oil rights in the Middle East and fighting a war so we can babysit it.

    Oil is so last century. Forward with the alt energy sources please.

    I hope the dawning century has little use for jerkweeds like Bush et al. Let them go fix the price of oil on someone else's dime.

  10. Re:Apex of Values? Hah. by Luke-Jr · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    By your logic justifying Mormonism as Christian, you also would be classifying Islam as Christian-- after all, they (claim to) only add onto the Bible also.

    Anyway, when most people say "Christian", they usually (AFAIK) mean someone who believes the Bible-- which only includes (real) Catholics.

    --
    Luke-Jr
  11. Re:Apex of Values? Hah. by Luke-Jr · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    They don't follow Christ's teachings, nor do they believe in the one, true God. Only Catholics believe in the true God and follow His teachings.

    --
    Luke-Jr
  12. Re:Apex of Values? Hah. by mOdQuArK! · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    They have a different extra book.

    Just like the Muslims have a "different extra book".

  13. Re:Hot Karl + Dirty Sanchez = Saddamy by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    What the hell do trees have to do with any of it?

    To the contrary, every sentence of your insane post is the echo of a rightwing talking point. The US backed Saddam's mass killings - Rumsfeld gladhanded him all the way. Saddam was no threat to the US - even the illegal, increased bombings to goad him into attacking didn't get him to do it. There was no link between Saddam and the 9/11/2001 planebombings, and Osama wasn't working with him. You're parroting a series of neocon talking points, including your prattle about "common sense": those are popular lies, chanted like a mantra every day by the corporate media to which you're addicted.

    As for my .sig, and your demented waving of wands about it, you're a warmonger. Are you posting from Iraq, you yellow coward? Demanding we send people to fight your "common sense" war, but too chickenshit to do anything but type about it? What about the Taliban in Afghanistan? Where does "common sense" come in there, as we leave that job unfinished? That job of defending America from real terrorists who attacked us? Your insane adventure in Iraq is making Afghanistan back into the place that Osama attacked us from. And making Iraq into a place that other assholes like him, associated or not, are attacking us from. Your insane twists on "common sense" are creating more terrorists, threatening us. You're as bad as the Afghanis who stood by watching the Taliban back the Qaeda terrorists. You're much worse, because the Afghanis had no choice, at gunpoint - you're doing it gladly, to yourself. You sad, sick bastard - the enemy within. Congratulations on your victories.

    --

    --
    make install -not war