Linux illegal ?

[PuReExcTacy]

Hmm, seems to me like SCO is painting a big hacking bulls eye on their ass. Didn't their site get taking down like a week or so ago because of this?


--PuRe

[er0k]

Originally posted here by noODle
I just stumbled accross the following site and I thought I should share it here.

How serious is this ?
Any opinions

SOURCE

this is the biggest bunch of malarky i have ever heard. Regardless of it being stolen or not, its not the users problem to worry about using linux still. There are no grounds for whether the code has been stolen or not anyway, and its the person who submits the code's fault, not anyone elses. The code is reviewed to be good or bad, work or not, compatibility, or not. That is all. If its stolen, its no ones problem but the person submitting. Big deal. There is no way to prove if it were stolen or not anyway unless by actually confronting each and every person about it, or by looking at the source of every program related to that in the world to see if it were GPL or not, This is arrant boolshit.

[IceStorm]

Originally posted here by Qualm
SCO's target is IBM, not Linux. There's a good article about it in one of the Linux magazines (sorry I forget which). The whole thing has very little to do with Linux itself, and a lot to do with SCO's former (fading fast) position as a licensor of *nix code to the OS efforts of Sun, HP, and IBM.

Linux users may happily and completely ignore SCO. The letter is just a minor ploy in SCO's efforts to force IBM to buy them out (as detailed in the article.)

- Qualm

I do agree (from what I have read) that SCO does seem more interested in IBM. But, SCO warn that commercial users of Linux may be legally liable in the second paragraph of this link. http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news...le.php/2207791

There may be prior art to SCO’s claims. Perhaps they “borrowed” from a BSD variant.

Even if (and that is a big if) SCO proves that their IP is in the Linux Kernel, how long do you think it will take to work around the SCO code  SCO is burning some bridges with the open source community that is for sure.

All this IP crap makes me sick. What's next? Someone claiming a patient on using a 'for' loop incrementally on array elements?

[\/IP3R]

What the ****, I am even going to send an e-mail about this big hoax they are making. I will even spread this news to other boards. I am telling you, they ani't got no business putting hoaxes around. Pardon my french.

[Ghostdog]

Linux first public version was in 1991, we were in 2003. 12 years to say that something is illegal or use things without permission, SCO take his time. If someone has to tell something it's Andrew Tannenbaum because Linux is based on Minix. If linux is illegal so all the posix based OS are illegal.

[noODle]

The story continues:
It seems Microsoft is getting into it:

LINDON, Utah, May 19, 2003 -- The SCO® Group (SCO) (Nasdaq: SCOX), the owner of the UNIX® operating system, today announced it has licensed its UNIX technology including a patent and source code licenses to Microsoft® Corporation.

SOURCE

[Shrekkie]

OMG, this isn't happening ....

/me quickly finishes his Gentoo - install and deletes the popup to send an error-report to M$.

Ugh, don't make me think about entering a registrationcode for for.ex. Openoffice.

[MemorY]

i fullt agree with all your posts ... i have no word..my brain stoped functioning ... whas the world gonna be like if Open Source Linux Goes .... microsoft Signs everywhere ... windows Longhorn up to 5,000 $$ ....aaaaa..somebody wake me up.... ... i think the article is a hoax ....thats just my opinion i could be wrong ....

[noODle]

The articles are no hoaxes.

edit:
News Dot Com Special Coverage

[MemorY]

damn...

this is some bull sh*t