Hi all members,
I found an article I believe all GNU/Linux lovers (ie SCO haters) should read.
Forgive me if this has been posted here before...
<picked up from informit.com>
The Santa Cruz Organization (SCO), which owns the UNIX copyrights, recently sued IBM
claiming copyright infringements by (they claim) using SCO intellectual property in
Linux. IBM refused to settle and instead said they'd take it to court. Hear what Linux
pundit Nicholas Petreley has to say about the matter in this thoughtful column.
"Two questions come to mind as I approach the topic of SCO and its ongoing anti-Linux
jihad. Where do I start, and when will it all end?
I should start with the recent revelations about the so-called evidence against IBM.
There is new information that at least some of the most important common source code
between Linux and SCO UNIX actually originated with Sequent.
Is The Truth Relevant?
I hesitate to explore this new evidence about the evidence, because I'm not convinced
any of it matters. Pardon the cynicism, but it is not without a foundation in personal
experience. This suit is destined for a court of law. My personal experience as a
defendant and as an expert witness have taught me to be cynical about the justice
system. If these experiences (I will spare you the details) were isolated incidents, I
might still be optimistic. But my opinions have also been shaped by historic court
decisions that determined that if you're stupid enough to place a cup of hot coffee
between your legs, the fast food restaurant that brewed the coffee must be held
responsible.
So when I rotate around the source code and copyright issues to examine every side, I
am reluctant to speculate about the outcome as if the truth matters. It usually
doesn't. I know lawyers who recognize truth when they see it. I know some who might
even take a stand on the truth outside the courtroom. But I have yet to meet a lawyer
who actually leverages and respects the truth in a case. Lawyers tend to build their
strategies based on how much money is involved, where the money is located, how much
of that money can possibly be awarded in court decisions, and what they have to
convince the court to believe in order to get the best portion of that money.
Everything else, truth included, is negotiable or disposable. Anyone who reads the
D.O.J. findings of fact must come face-to-face with this reality to understand why
Microsoft is now once again on its worst behavior, unchecked by legal restraints.
The Sequents Of Events
Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that the new information does matter. Here's
the current speculation: Someone at Sequent wrote and contributed useful code to SCO
UNIX. IBM bought Sequent. The same code showed up in Linux.
The knee-jerk reaction to this news is that Sequent owns at least the algorithms and
ideas (the abstract intellectual property), if not the copyrights to the source code
itself. This means that if IBM, Sequent's new proud owner, wants to put the code in
Linux, it has every right to do so.
Even if SCO has some rights to this code, one can no longer argue that IBM stole the
code from SCO to make Linux great, because IBM (Sequent) invented the code, not SCO.
Indeed, since IBM was indirectly responsible for improving SCO UNIX with the code in
the first place, SCO should be indebted to IBM for the innovation, not the other way
around.
Let's assume for a moment that the court decides IBM did not have the right to re-use
this code in Linux. What is the remedy for the offense? I don't mean monetary remedy
-- we haven't gotten to the issue of monetary damages yet. I'm talking strictly about
what it would take to correct the offense.
The remedy seems obvious. IBM and/or the Linux Kernel maintainers should remove the
offending code and replace it with original code that performs the same function. That
seems a bit silly, doesn't it?
It might give a twisted mind at SCO some satisfaction knowing that SCO was able to put
IBM and the Kernel developers to the trouble. But if Linux will end up with the
features either way, and IBM/Sequent invented the code in the first place, why should
it have to go through the contortions of modifying the code just so it won't look like
the SCO code anymore?
Counting The Change
There's an even more interesting ramification to this new information about the origin
of the offending code, and that brings us to the monetary remedy. The SCO lawsuit now
seeks $3 billion in damages, up from $1 billion, ostensibly because this code made
Linux so competitive that it destroyed the market for SCO UNIX.
So someone answer me this. If the code is identical, how did it make Linux more
competitive than SCO UNIX? If both Linux and SCO benefit from this code, it doesn't
give Linux the edge, it levels the playing field, doesn't it? After all, it's the same
code, isn't it?
If you're still with me, then one must ask the next logical question. If this code
made Linux equal -- not superior, equal -- to SCO UNIX in what SCO seems to believe is
a critical aspect of the operating systems, then why did Linux stomp all over SCO
sales?
Is it possible that people prefer Linux to SCO UNIX for other reasons?
Let's look at this from a slightly different angle. It's a decidedly personal one, but
those of you who agree with my opinion might see an interesting consequence to this
line of thinking.
Here's the opinion. SCO UNIX is a dog. I recall trying to install and use various
versions of SCO Open Server several times. I've had mixed results, but never good
results. Most of the time, it was so much trouble to install that I never completed
the installation. Obviously others have had better luck, or nobody would be using it
at all. But SCO UNIX has always struck me as the most quirky, unfriendly and overall
poorly conceived commercial UNIX on the planet. Solaris, HP-UX, Irix, AIX and others
are far easier to install and manage, in part because they are more mature and
specialized implementations of UNIX, and in part because they are designed to run on
specialized hardware instead of unpredictable configurations of Intel machines.
The Heart Of The Matter
Since SCO UNIX is such a downer, could Linux have destroyed the SCO market with or
without any of the code SCO alleges is its intellectual property? One can answer that
simply by looking at the better alternatives. The rapid growth in Linux has been
eroding the market for every flavor or UNIX, including Solaris, HP-UX, Irix, and
others. Yet neither Linus Torvalds nor IBM had to steal secrets from Sun,
Hewlett-Packard or SGI to accomplish this. Therefore, there must be something about
Linux that people desire more than these alternatives.
I think you can guess what that "something" might be. Linux is free software and open
source. That, my friends, is the crux of this whole case. Linux is not a threat
because it includes source code that is also present in SCO UNIX. Linux is a threat
because all the source code, common or uncommon, is open and free.
Linux leaves SCO with few ways to survive, two of which seem rather obvious. First,
SCO could get off its heinie and start turning SCO UNIX into something someone might
actually prefer to Linux. That is obviously too strenuous for the company, because the
SCO leadership has instead chosen to seek an easier way to restore its prior existence
of comfortable mediocrity.
That brings us to the other alternative, which is equally obvious -- not because it is
logical or makes sense, but because SCO has been doing it so loudly. SCO has decided
instead to throw one pre-adolescent tantrum after another. SCO has announced one
outrageous claim and target after another, each time promising that it has no other
intentions. Each time, SCO is (rightfully) ridiculed in the press, after which it
breaks its promise and launches an attack on another victim, from 1,500 companies to
Linus Torvalds himself.
SCO clearly has no talent to build on, no products with which to survive, and no
leadership other than a cadre of poor losers. I'm tempted to say they're simply
losers, but given my cynical view of the justice system, the outcome of all these
shenanigans remains to be seen."
</picked up from informit.com>
Enjoyed it ?
Rajorshi Biswas,
Fourth Year (Seventh Semester),
Indian Institute Of Information Technology Calcutta,
Homepage : http://www.rajorshi.tk
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from Indiatimes at http://email.indiatimes.com
Buy The Best In BOOKS at http://www.bestsellers.indiatimes.com
Bid for for Air Tickets @ Re.1 on Air Sahara Flights. Just log on to
http://airsahara.indiatimes.com and Bid Now !
--
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the body
"unsubscribe ilug-cal" and an empty subject line.
FAQ: http://www.ilug-cal.org/node.php?id=3
