The EULA will require that bullets be regularly fired and replaced by the same brand only.
To keep the honest people honest, all new guns and bullets will contain RFIDs so that guns can prevent the customer from accidentally loading uncertified bootleg bullets. This stunning new innovation will also protect from accidentally firing ammunition which is beyond its best before date. And don't mind entries in the national bullet owner database, that is necessary to fight terrorism.
SCO claims IBM had no right to distribute some code under the GPL. IBM argues SCO themselves distributed said code under the GPL, so SCO must attack the GPL to have a case. You say if the GPL was invalid SCO violated the copyright of the Linux authors including IBM.
Actually SCO believes they never put the code in dispute under the GPL, even being part of the kernel they distributed under the GPL. So what they really challenge is the legal binding of viral clauses of the GPL. How authors weave copyrights, perhaps accidentally, by mere distributing. Contrast this with their "all your code becomes Unix" theory which is based on a contract signed by both parties.
We finally got to see what was presumably their best evidence, and it was a steaming turd of donkeyshit.
We have barely seen any facts yet. Is it wishful thinking or what else makes everyone believe they have nothing better to show in court?
While many of their allegations sound bizarre and seem to be wrong, I for one am not convinced they're all baseless. Consider SCO is undisputable spreading FUD. Making themselves appear to be a bunch of morons which need not be taken serious could be another tactic.
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder what these worm trail pictures tell us about the Pentium 4 design. Can anyone identify the 64 bit extensions?
The EULA will require that bullets be regularly fired and replaced by the same brand only.
To keep the honest people honest, all new guns and bullets will contain RFIDs so that guns can prevent the customer from accidentally loading uncertified bootleg bullets. This stunning new innovation will also protect from accidentally firing ammunition which is beyond its best before date. And don't mind entries in the national bullet owner database, that is necessary to fight terrorism.
SCO claims IBM had no right to distribute some code under the GPL. IBM argues SCO themselves distributed said code under the GPL, so SCO must attack the GPL to have a case. You say if the GPL was invalid SCO violated the copyright of the Linux authors including IBM.
Actually SCO believes they never put the code in dispute under the GPL, even being part of the kernel they distributed under the GPL. So what they really challenge is the legal binding of viral clauses of the GPL. How authors weave copyrights, perhaps accidentally, by mere distributing. Contrast this with their "all your code becomes Unix" theory which is based on a contract signed by both parties.
We finally got to see what was presumably their best evidence, and it was a steaming turd of donkeyshit.
We have barely seen any facts yet. Is it wishful thinking or what else makes everyone believe they have nothing better to show in court?
While many of their allegations sound bizarre and seem to be wrong, I for one am not convinced they're all baseless. Consider SCO is undisputable spreading FUD. Making themselves appear to be a bunch of morons which need not be taken serious could be another tactic.