SCO Says Email Is Inaccurate

daria42 writes "The SCO Group has slammed as 'inaccurate' suggestions that an e-mail from one of its own engineers showed Linux did not contain copyright Unix code, and even forwarded its own historical memo to journalists in an attempt to discredit the e-mail published on Groklaw." From the article: "This memo shows that Mr. Davidson's e-mail is referring to an investigation limited to literal copying, which is not the standard for copyright violations, and which can be avoided by deliberate obfuscation, as the memo itself points out..." We reported on the email yesterday.

Comments

Avoiding Jail

[drooling-dog]

Anybody else getting the feeling that these guys are just trying to stay out of jail now?

OMGWTFBBQ

[aws4y]

I just read the Fscking email and it says the opposite of what Stowell said. The email states directly that this entire scheme was concoted because executives cannot understand that simpling because two things work the same way it dosent mean that one thing is a copy of the other. This just makes them look more guilty of sock manipulation, this also brings into question there direct statements to the public. If an officer at a corporation lies to the public but didn't know it at the time then he or she made a mistake. If you lie to the public and you know its a lie, then that is fraud.

this memo clearly shows that SCO executives knew that there was no litteral copying in GNU/Linux, they then went out and made statements that they new were demonstrably false, i.e. Daryl's Line by Line copying comment. It is now very clear that SCO executives should at least be charged with fraud.

OT, but somewhat relevant to the issues at hand

[Anonymous Coward]

If SCO does end up prevailing at all in this circus, then I predict that someday musical instument makers, like say for example, Stienway Pianos, will claim that because you used one of their pianos to compose a song, then that song is automatically a "derivative work" of their I.P. and therefore you must pay license royalties back to them. Ditto for public performances played on the instruments. A portion of each concert ticket sold must be paid back to them, and free public performances would be outlawed because that would be "stealing potential revenue" from them.

Someday, you will have to agree to a usage rights control contract for everything you buy.

Somebody will patent some kind of registration system to track all kinds of usages of all these products and you're be required to be a member of that before you'll even be able permitted to purchase anything at all, and you'll actually not be purchaing anything, but rather leasing the temporary usage rights for a short term.