on Sat, Nov 22, 2003 at 10:28:00AM -0500, Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
I agree that open source must win this thing, but thinking like a
lawyer matters too...no need to chase false hopes or expend resources
hopelessly.
I'm not saying that legal rigor doesn't matter, and
True, the potential impacts of U.S. litigation -expense- and -duration-
shouldn't be ignored, if one wants to speculate re. the outcome and/or re. the
interim tactical aspects of SCO v. IBM (and the IBM v. SCO counterclaims). (Those
factors can be huge. I often use documentation of U.S.
on Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 09:38:42AM -0800, Lawrence E. Rosen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Thursday, November 13, 2003 3:41 AM, Mahesh T. Pai wrote:
Could not any of the copyright holders to the Linux Kernel sources
(I understand that there are several, since Linus does not
seek
Why would we bother? We'd be in the same court, with the same attorneys,
and the same issues to resolve, as SCO/IBM are already. Does the open
source community need yet another lawsuit? /Larry Rosen
-Original Message-
From: Mahesh T. Pai [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
4 matches
Mail list logo
