"Lucius, Leland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ...their source to make ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN things match up with the kernel
> tree?
>
> And how do they prove it wasn't the other way around? SCO employees taking
> from the Linux kernel to look good to their bosses?
>
>
actually - that's one of the purposes of escrows, etc...
A company can assert that it wrote the code in year X; and can
verify that with a 3rd party escrow agent that coughs up the
escrow from year X with the source on it.
Of course; you could manipulate the escrow agent, but that
agent wouldn't be in business very long after that happened.
So - presumably in a situation like this, SCO would be able
to show, via a virtual "paper trail" at the escrow agent,
that is had written that source.
Until something like that shows up, though, my thought is
that this is a look-and-feel argument. i.e. "that looks like
and feels like something we did, so it must be our source."
It would hope/expect the argument from SCO's side to be
a little more forceful/compelling than that. That is, in a trial,
I would expect SCO to produce this escrow trail detailing the
source's progeny; and then make an argument that the source is
the same. But, I don't imagine there will be any disclosure
until an actual trial.
So - until something happens - we're all just guessing.
- Dave R. -
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Work: (919) 676-0847
Get your mainframe programming tools at http://www.dignus.com
