On Monday, 27 January 2003 at 11:51:44 -0800, Gary W. Swearingen wrote:
> Bill Moran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
>>> I'm more inclined to think that these are different parts of the same
>>> company who don't (didn't) know about the other part.
>> Another strong possibility.  Happens all the time.
> Not this time.  The reports are quoting the CEO from interviews and
> official letters.  They are reporting the creation of a new business
> unit ("SCOsource") to handle company intellectual property.  The purpose
> is obviously not to get good publicity.
> http://siliconvalley.internet.com/news/article.php/1573491 quotes the CEO:
>     "SCO is [...] identifying where intellectual property violations
>     have taken place, and helping resolve those violations"
> http://news.com.com/2100-1001-981569.html?tag=fd_top quotes the CEO:
>     "To us, it's not an issue of: Is Linux violating (SCO intellectual
>     property)? It's an issue of: Is anybody violating it?"
> And it quotes the CEO noting the presence of their code in (Mac) OS/X.
> We can hope that he doesn't know something about the secret agreements
> over that code which we don't,

Which secret agreements?  The license is public, and it doesn't leave
any space for secret agreements.

> and is just an ignorant CEO speaking too soon, and that his new
> lawyer will educate him about the code's status.

I suspect that this is the case.

Could we now please take this off -questions?  Continue on advocacy@
if you want.

When replying to this message, please copy the original recipients.
If you don't, I may ignore the reply or reply to the original recipients.
For more information, see http://www.lemis.com/questions.html
See complete headers for address and phone numbers

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message

Reply via email to