That's why I was surprised when you said "$CO's Unix Sys V incorporates BSD codes in violation of BSD license." Incorporated (past tense) would be correct, but "incorporates" (present tense) would be very major news. ... Well, _contained_ (past tense), at least. ;-> It's conceivable that some unlabelled BSD code is still at issue, but we don't yet know, because (of course) Caldera/SCO is still being coy about specifics.
Thanks for the correction. Now I know I can never be a lawyer. ;)
It's at least equally likely, if not more so, that Caldera/SCO has independently reinvented AT&T's error of wrongfully incorporating publicly available work without attribution (this time, concerning something newer than 4.3BSD or Net2), and thus fooled itself into thinking the borrowing went the other way when they re-encounter the publicly available source, later.
That's a good one.
o Caldera/SCO is desperate, and desperate people do crazy and unpredictable things. o Caldera/SCO's management are delusional and acting against the company interest. o Caldera/SCO's management are pursuing a short-term strategy to increase their stock price, and/or to get bought out.
The $CO Group's Senior Vice President of Engineering and Global Services, selling almost all his shares in the company last June 9 might give some clue on what is going on inside $CO. If the VP knows they will win the case, his shares would almost be priceless by then (All Unix derivatives paying royalties to $CO) and he would certainly not sell his shares. There could be some other reason for it, though the action provokes some thinking.
I think $CO's situation could be a combination of the last three possiblities you mentioned. Here is one scenario:
1. $CO finds itself without a business model after its Linux venture failed and its Unixware sales continously declined. Managements sees a bleak future for the company. 2. $CO gets _secret_ offer from M$. 3. In desperation, $CO agrees, they're back in business and starts digging on Sys V and Linux source. It took one year. 4. They found similarities in the comments but not the actual code (as stated by a German who saw the codes without signing an NDA by accident). 5. Files a suit against IBM. 6. M$ pays $CO for a job well done (M$ paid millions for a license from $CO it doesn't really need). 7. $CO realizes its new business model (extortion?) is profitable. Share price goes up. Management quietly sells its share. 8. Court rules $CO cannot use similarities in comments as basis for infringement. Novell proves Unix Sys V is still their IP. $CO is left without a business model again. 9. IBM and Unix contributors buries $CO in countersuits. 10. M$ gets our undivided love and attention once more.
-- Mike P
Dear Redmond, you should know this by now. Linux Is Not UniX. -- Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph) Official Website: http://plug.linux.org.ph Searchable Archives: http://marc.free.net.ph . To leave, go to http://lists.q-linux.com/mailman/listinfo/plug . Are you a Linux newbie? To join the newbie list, go to http://lists.q-linux.com/mailman/listinfo/ph-linux-newbie
