On Fri, 2004-04-16 at 22:52, Tom Anderson wrote: > Probably not smart to post this to THIS group, but I am curious about > the truth/falsity of their claims, and I would think you all would be > up on the details.
The short answer is "Go read Groklaw." There's a lot of stuff there, which explains all of this in far more detail, and probably far better, than you're going to get on this mailing list. The slightly longer answer is that SCO, so far, hasn't produced any evidence showing specific copying of anything that's not found in BSD Unix, which has, well, the BSD license on it. Now, the records of the AT&T/BSD lawsuit are still sealed, I think, so it's not really clear who stole what from whom when. SCO has talked big, but produced very little in the way of verifiable or falsifiable allegations. I think SCO was simply gambling that it would be cheaper for IBM to settle and buy them off--or to just buy them--than to fight it. This was very likely a correct analysis, except that IBM, I suppose, felt that that would set a very unhealthy precedent, and that buying off *everyone* who thought SCO's idea was good and copied it would be more expensive than fighting in court. Adam ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
