I've seen one other, in which the FPers got to see around 5 files on the page, then the (Windoze-powered, using IIS, might I add) server....just.................slowed....down...............and.......stopped.
That was before Subscribers saw mysterious future.
Of course, we will prepare our legal response as required by your complaint. Be advised that our response will likely include counterclaims for copyright infringement and conspiracy
Does this suggest to somebody other than me that SCO is likely smoking something? Just an idea, considering that SCOX has been less than on top of it all, considering they're claiming the lawsuit against IBM is an IP discussion, where the appropriate term would be "Horse-whipping deliver--erm, I mean "breach of contract lawsuit"
IMO, SCOX has a lot of work to do if they want to win. It would be easier to just be bought out by IBM, who would release Unix code into the public domain, thus ending the copyright dispute.
On the SCO case, versus IBM. What is the generally accepted legal definition of "derivative works", in terms of IBM's ownership of JFS and RCU? Because AFAIK, the version of JFS that is currently inside Linux originated at some point from the OS/2 operating system, a non-Unix-based system, and then was ported to Linux and AIX. I'm wondering if SCO has legal rights to software that is ported from one OS to another, then to another, where the second porting target OS is licensed by SCO.
Of course, I'm also wondering if it's legal to send my evil minions against Darl McBuyed.
Slashdot Mirror
When the hell did comments like this start getting 1 , Insightful? Sorry moderators, but I think somebody's been smoking something.
If I were moderating, this would be -5, Asshat,Obvious,Redundant.
Don't forget the Californian City with SCO in its name, what's it called, San FranciSCO?
I've seen one other, in which the FPers got to see around 5 files on the page, then the (Windoze-powered, using IIS, might I add) server....just.................slowed....down..... ..........and.......stopped.
That was before Subscribers saw mysterious future.
Does this suggest to somebody other than me that SCO is likely smoking something? Just an idea, considering that SCOX has been less than on top of it all, considering they're claiming the lawsuit against IBM is an IP discussion, where the appropriate term would be "Horse-whipping deliver--erm, I mean "breach of contract lawsuit"
IMO, SCOX has a lot of work to do if they want to win. It would be easier to just be bought out by IBM, who would release Unix code into the public domain, thus ending the copyright dispute.
On the SCO case, versus IBM. What is the generally accepted legal definition of "derivative works", in terms of IBM's ownership of JFS and RCU? Because AFAIK, the version of JFS that is currently inside Linux originated at some point from the OS/2 operating system, a non-Unix-based system, and then was ported to Linux and AIX. I'm wondering if SCO has legal rights to software that is ported from one OS to another, then to another, where the second porting target OS is licensed by SCO.
Of course, I'm also wondering if it's legal to send my evil minions against Darl McBuyed.