Linux illegal ?

I just stumbled accross the following site and I thought I should share it here.

Quote:

---

By contrast, much of Linux has been built from contributions by numerous unrelated and unknown software developers, each contributing a small section of code. There is no mechanism inherent in the Linux development process to assure that intellectual property rights, confidentiality or security are protected. The Linux process does not prevent inclusion of code that has been stolen outright, or developed by improper use of proprietary methods and concepts.

---

How serious is this ?
Any opinions

SOURCE

can you please post a link to the rest of the article please?

Sorry i forgot, I added it !

WTF???

This has to be a hoax, i mean common people. This sounds like more like M$ than the GPL/GNU. Let this be said, if linux goes, i will never touch a computer again!!

Bye Now! :(

It's SCO's attempt to a) control the Linux market and b) cash grab. IIRC, Linux is a GPL concept and IIRC, built from scratch. If SCO is truly serious, they should consider going after MS over DOS which contains portions ported directly from *nix, without permission I'm quite sure. In addition, their claim of stolen intellectual property will be hard to defend in court if the code of the various components was never challenged prior to now.

They only recently acquired the "Unix" name, after purchasing it from AT&T. IIRC, AT&T tried a similar action and failed. I would be curious to see how the courts deal with this.

//addon

Let me get a clear mind before responding more to this post here! This SUX big time.

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

SCO are suing IBM for $1billion over this (read in Linux Format last month). They're not targetting Linux in general, just the way IBM distributes it.

Basically, it's a company that's failed to keep up with the times making a last ditch attempt to salvage something from its failing *nix business. They are gambling on either winning the case (VERY unlikely, since IBM probably has much better lawyers and a stronger case) or being bought out by someone else (i.e. it is a publicity stunt of sorts).

People working on Linux shouldn't be too worried though.

Damn you pwaring .... I was just starting to get a kick out of thinking of myself as some Uber Elite Cyber Outlaw ..... on the run with my linux machine :)

Seriously tho, thanks for info/link, very informative.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by Phat_Penguin
Damn you pwaring .... I was just starting to get a kick out of thinking of myself as some Uber Elite Cyber Outlaw ..... on the run with my linux machine :)

Seriously tho, thanks for info/link, very informative.

---

LOL the linux outlaws ;)

This have definitly something to do with the recent (arg since a while ;) ) IBM promotion for Linux on their servers and mainframe servers.
http://www-1.ibm.com/services/e-business/linux.html

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

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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?

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.

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.

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

Quote:

---

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

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.

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 ....

The articles are no hoaxes.

edit:
News Dot Com Special Coverage

damn...

this is some bull sh*t

As you may have read (http://news.com.com/2100-1016_3-1007528.html) M$ is going to license code from SCO/Caldera. M$ said it is respecting IP, but maybe they are just trying to legitimize SCO’s claim that Linux violates their (SCO) IP (http://www.sco.com/scosource/letter..._customers.html).

Just a thought, but what if this Unix IP that SCO supposedly owns turns out to be GPL’d code that was taken from Linux. After all Caldera has sold their version of Linux for years. Wouldn’t that be something if it turned out M$ was licensing and using GPL’d code in violation of the GPL. Would M$ respect the IP that is under the GPL and free any extension or integration of the original GPL’d code?

As difficult as it may be to understand, this article is most definitely not a hoax... As MsMittens said, it is an effort at increasing SCO's profits. And after these press releases and such, they definitely need any help they can get. By even considering this lawsuit, they have permanently black-listed the SCO name.

But, as far as I can understand, the whole point behind Linux is that it IS open source. SCO's statement is trying to make it seem like having many different contributors to the source is a negative thing. I couldn't disagree more. The major strength of Linux is that we as programmers/users/hackers/whatever-we-are are free to change it as we see fit. SCO's "officially licensed" releases of UNIX are in fact "weaker" than Linux because of the relatively small group of people working on the UNIX project. Take the number of people on SCO's payroll and compare that to every single Linux user on this planet. Even if the Linux user is not a hardcore programmer, they still know enough to decide what they like and don't like about the OS, and they commonly forward that information to programmers. I used to try to send emails to Microsoft complaining about specific things in the Windows OS. After seeing no changes, nor even getting replies, I have given up. But when I suggest something to a Linux developer, I at least get a reply.

In conclusion, Linux is always going to have opposition from people who are afraid of how marvelous it could become with all the best programmers in the world working on it. But, more importantly, Linux has always had, has, and will always have, die-hard fans who have turned a simple OS into a religion. There is no end to the growth of Linux.

And even if Linux is "outlawed", who really cares? Downloading free music has been "outlawed", but it still happens. If Linux is outlawed, I will continue to use it and wear my "crime" as a badge of honor.

My 2 or so cents.

--PhirePhreak

Torvalds speaks out. http://www.crn.com/sections/Breaking...rticleID=42122

They compare SCO to the Raelians, on not releasing any real evidence. That's pretty funny. Torvalds said that he doesn’t see anything wrong in the code. The speculation that SCO is just out to make a quick buck continues. At one point Torvalds notes that since SCO cannot compete in the market they will sue instead.

It is impossible to declare linux illegal. without linux, the computers factorys can close their doors because if this happens M$ and the other companies will raise the price of their software.

Calm down everyone and read this

http://www.opensource.org/sco-vs-ibm.html#id2854550

Never piss off scary smart people.