Slashdot Mirror
They Make Stuff? SCO's OpenServer 6 Reviewed
turnitover writes "And here I thought their revenue was all based on projected lawsuit returns. But no, The SCO Group actually has turned out something that does something -- or does it? In any case, looks like eWEEK has reviewed OpenServer 6. From the review: though the company 'seems like an unlikely outlet for open-source software, the company has extended OpenServer with updated versions of Samba, Perl, PHP and other key components.'"
If you wrote any of the code that went into OpenServer (KDE, Samba etc) then I would suggest you do at least send them a Cease and Desist letter. If they claim that the GPL is invalid, then they must not be distributing it in accordance with the GPL. If they are not distributing it in accordance with the GPL, then they have no legal justification for distributing it at all.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Licences explicitly forbidding SCO to include and redistribute them would no longer be free according to our OSI and DFSG guidelines. We might not like them using our code, but that's one of the freedoms we have granted our users, and to restrict that would take away that freedom, and would mean that GNU/Linux distributions such as Debian could no longer redistribute it.
http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php
5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups
The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons.
and
http://www.debian.org/social_contract
5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups
The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons.
6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor
The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic research.