The article i read said they'd pursue litigation against commercial Linux users, Linux vendors, but not home users. Still, that goes against what SCO said from the beginning. This whole thing smells like a grand scheme that some suit thought up, and these little extra tidbits are carefully timed and released every few weeks to keep this story (and linux FUD) in the press. A CEO sees this bad press in Infoworld every few weeks and starts to wonder... So it wouldn't surprise me one bit if Microsoft had a hand in this.
I wonder why IBM/Sun/HP even play with SCO... you'd think one of them would have just bought the Unix IP and been done with it. The other thing is i'm hearing SCO probably "borrowed" a lot of linux code to put into SCO Unix... and now will say that IBM/Linux stole it from them. It will be difficult to prove that in court. Oh well, at least if linux is sued out of existence, i'll still have my Win 2003 box: http://www.r-a-y.org/gallery/view_photo.php?set_albumName=win2k3&id=mvc_003f -ray On Wed, 14 May 2003, Shannon Roddy wrote: > Yeah, I saw that about an hour ago. This is really the last thing that > the Linux movement needs is a bunch of CEOs with business degrees and no > common sense getting letters about possible IP infringement (read: > lawsuit) because they are using Linux. > > Also, the article that I read said that SCO came out and said that they > are going to start using tactics like the RIAA and threatening end > users. I think the leaders of the RIAA, MPAA, and SCO should be taken > out back and hung from a very tall tree. > > I also wonder if Microsoft is infusing them with cash to keep them > afloat. The funny thing is that Linux Journal did a writeup on SCO's > own linux distribution last month, which they have since decided to stop > selling AND supporting. > > I wish that people with broken/outdated business models and products > would stop depending on legislation and/or law suits to keep them alive. > > Shannon
