On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 16:15:35 -0400
James Knott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> You might want to do some reading on Groklaw about this.  One thing the 
> court made clear, was that since the original SCO didn't have the money 
> to buy Unix outright, Novell came up with a license deal, where they 
> retained the copyrights among other things, until the new SCO forwarded 
> enough license revenue to complete the deal.  This means that had 
> sufficient revenue come from SCO, all rights would have been transferred 
> to them.  So, they did not buy a "bill of goods".  As for the derivative 
> works, what SCO claims greatly exceeds what the original arrangement was 
> with AT&T, which AT&T verified in a letter to IBM and elsewhere.  SCO 
> then tried to retroactively and unilaterally claim much more.

You are confusing The Santa Cruz Operation - the company that bought
the Unix licenses from Novell with The SCO Group which is formerly
Caldera that bought the The Santa Cruz Operation Unix division. What I
meant by "bill of goods" refers to Caldera's purchasing The Santa Cruz
Operation's Unix division. When Caldera International acquired that
division, the question is did they think they were getting all the
copyrights. I'm 100% sure that The Santa Cruz Operation knew what they
were getting from Novell. 

While I think that SCO's "derivative works" claim is weak, they are
challenging this in the court. IBM's problem in that side is the terms
in the official contract vs. the later communications. I'm 100% certain
that IBM would never have agreed to the original "derivative works"
clause, but what matters is the legality of the documentation. Can IBM
prove to the court that the contract was amended to remove the
"derivative works" clause. However, I do agree that SCO's
interpretation is somewhat bizarre, but both SCO and IBM have some of
the best attorneys available. So until it is adjudicated either by a
Judge Kimball judgement or the result of the trial, it is still on the
table. 

-- 
Jerry Feldman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Boston Linux and Unix user group
http://www.blu.org PGP key id:C5061EA9
PGP Key fingerprint:053C 73EC 3AC1 5C44 3E14 9245 FB00 3ED5 C506 1EA9

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to