I'm glad you think that truck drivers are in the same class as whores and drug dealers. I am sure they would love to hear that from an elitist like you.
Besides, posting as AC doesn't hide the fact that we all know who you are.
Its hard to tell where humor begins and ends around here. Apparently no one belives that it is even POSSIBLE that SCO is right. Not even POSSIBLE!!! And those that think that they may actually have a valid case get modded down into oblivion.
"Of course any code that we don't own is always removed from GPL software. WE respect the property rights of others. It would be unlawful for us to allow such code to remain in place"
Well apparently that didn't happen in this case. According to SCO, the code is in the code base. It is too late to say sorry and take it out.
"Well, because companies the world over can and have been auditting periodically open source things for IP violations"
No, they haven't. They couldn't since then they would need to have access to the closed source product, in this case SCO's UNIX. There are no controls, no auditing, nothing; just emailed patches and a CVS.
This is why I am saying it is beginning to look like valid claims. You cannot just ignore the fact that everyone who has seen the code under NDA admits that the code is identical, EVEN DOWN TO THE COMMENTS.
Yes, we all know the patches go through a maintainer, BUT THE MAINTAINER DOESN'T CHECK IF THE PATCH IS "CLEAN" FROM IP ISSUES. There are NO CONTROLS in place to make sure that this "mixing" doesn't occur.
"If SCO had a valid case, they would NOT be showing this stuff under a NDA"
Nonsense. Says who? If I was SCO this is how I would proceed until there was a trial. Otherwise they lose their leverage because the infringing code would be corrected.
Yes, it is true - if you SHOWED ME TWO IDENTICAL PIECES OF CODE I could tell you that they were identical. Even a trained monkey could. Comments the same, variables, constants, protypes the same.
And I doubt SCO got it wrong, so the case where SCO copied rfom Linux seems UNLIKELY at best.
I know you don't like to hear it, so just close your eyes and ears.
Do you think the other way (Unix and Linux borrowed from SCO) is possible? Maybe, sure looks that way to me. There are NO CONTROLS in place to prevent this from happening. Heresy!!!!
BTW, the COMMENTS were the same. The code was IDENTICAL. It was copy and paste, not just similar implementations.
Of course, IT COULD BE VALID AS WELL. No one here wants to hear it, which is why I got a -1 flamebait.
I still maintain that IT LOOKS LIKE THEIR CLAIMS ARE VALID. It is unlikely that SCO copied from Linux, SCO would know the history and wouldn't make such a claim if that would be the case. Also, comments would be identical even if the implementation of the algorithm was. It is VERY LIKELY that a former or current SCO employee or someone who had access to the codebase simply added the code in. Why is that so hard for you people to believe? There are no controls in place to prevent it.
It looks from the analysts comments as if the SCO claims have merit. Even a non-programmer can tell that two code blocks are identical. Most likely the code in question was copied and pasted in this case. This is too bad, but it underscores the importance of keeping others IP out of your IP.
Good thing I use OpenBSD! Of couse my TiVO box is running Linux, but maybe they will switch over to BSD in the near future.
This I would agree. However, the GPL is "all or nothing", you can't have parts GPLed and other parts not GPLed. I suspect that the GPL is not valid in reality.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm glad you think that truck drivers are in the same class as whores and drug dealers. I am sure they would love to hear that from an elitist like you.
Besides, posting as AC doesn't hide the fact that we all know who you are.
Its hard to tell where humor begins and ends around here. Apparently no one belives that it is even POSSIBLE that SCO is right. Not even POSSIBLE!!! And those that think that they may actually have a valid case get modded down into oblivion.
"Of course any code that we don't own is always removed from GPL software. WE respect the property rights of others. It would be unlawful for us to allow such code to remain in place"
Well apparently that didn't happen in this case. According to SCO, the code is in the code base. It is too late to say sorry and take it out.
The reason is that if they didn't do it under an NDA the code in question would be changed and they would lose leverage in the upcoming suit.
According to SCO and the people who have seen the code in question the amount of code involved is quite large and exists in multiple places.
They have provided evidence supposedly, under NDA. This is for valid reasons.
:-/
Yeah, I am a paid poster. I work for Microsoft, SCO and the guys in the black helicopters.
Like anyone cares what the hell anyone says on slashdot.
Thats what sat phones are for. Ham is just a hobby for elitists.
Talk about pretentious!!!
This is baloney. I work at a company planning a rollout, and this is GARBAGE. There is no "loosing" of your TV channels.
What a "looser". Must be a ham.
What an elitist you are. No wonder hams get such a rep.
"SCO doesn't actually want to reveal it, because they know that it will be replaced with clean code almost instantly"
So you are saying that the code is dirty (infringing on SCO's IP)? Thats a first on Slashdot!
Give it up. They only listen to what they want to believe.
No, its not just that the implementations of an algorithm were the same, its that THE COMMENTS IN THE CODE WERE THE SAME. That is pretty telling.
"Well, because companies the world over can and have been auditting periodically open source things for IP violations"
No, they haven't. They couldn't since then they would need to have access to the closed source product, in this case SCO's UNIX. There are no controls, no auditing, nothing; just emailed patches and a CVS.
This is why I am saying it is beginning to look like valid claims. You cannot just ignore the fact that everyone who has seen the code under NDA admits that the code is identical, EVEN DOWN TO THE COMMENTS.
"It was really put in there, SCO would simply say "here is the stuff that was copied". "
Um, thats what they have done. They have just done it under NDA, for valid reasons.
Yes, we all know the patches go through a maintainer, BUT THE MAINTAINER DOESN'T CHECK IF THE PATCH IS "CLEAN" FROM IP ISSUES. There are NO CONTROLS in place to make sure that this "mixing" doesn't occur.
Linus admitted this himself.
"If SCO had a valid case, they would NOT be showing this stuff under a NDA"
Nonsense. Says who? If I was SCO this is how I would proceed until there was a trial. Otherwise they lose their leverage because the infringing code would be corrected.
Yes, it is true - if you SHOWED ME TWO IDENTICAL PIECES OF CODE I could tell you that they were identical. Even a trained monkey could. Comments the same, variables, constants, protypes the same.
And I doubt SCO got it wrong, so the case where SCO copied rfom Linux seems UNLIKELY at best.
I know you don't like to hear it, so just close your eyes and ears.
Do you think the other way (Unix and Linux borrowed from SCO) is possible? Maybe, sure looks that way to me. There are NO CONTROLS in place to prevent this from happening. Heresy!!!!
BTW, the COMMENTS were the same. The code was IDENTICAL. It was copy and paste, not just similar implementations.
Of course, IT COULD BE VALID AS WELL. No one here wants to hear it, which is why I got a -1 flamebait.
I still maintain that IT LOOKS LIKE THEIR CLAIMS ARE VALID. It is unlikely that SCO copied from Linux, SCO would know the history and wouldn't make such a claim if that would be the case. Also, comments would be identical even if the implementation of the algorithm was.
It is VERY LIKELY that a former or current SCO employee or someone who had access to the codebase simply added the code in. Why is that so hard for you people to believe? There are no controls in place to prevent it.
It looks from the analysts comments as if the SCO claims have merit. Even a non-programmer can tell that two code blocks are identical. Most likely the code in question was copied and pasted in this case. This is too bad, but it underscores the importance of keeping others IP out of your IP.
Good thing I use OpenBSD! Of couse my TiVO box is running Linux, but maybe they will switch over to BSD in the near future.
It must suck to be a poor liberal...
"Would that boost the economy? Would that help the poor?"
No, but it would make Walmart a lot richer and the Mexicans that make the stuff in Mexico a lot happier.
I'd rather cut the taxes of the corporations so that they can free that money for R&D.
What Courtney Love and idiots of that ilk don't understand is that they wouldn't make DIME WITHOUT THE RIAA.
The RIAA MAKES these people popular via marketing and promotions. This is why they deserve most of the profits.
This I would agree. However, the GPL is "all or nothing", you can't have parts GPLed and other parts not GPLed. I suspect that the GPL is not valid in reality.