...and if SCO is right...?

...and if SCO is right...?

I've never seen any organisation with a "process" to ensure that code really belongs to
the author.

Code is created by individuals. It would be almost impossible not to use the lessions,
techniques and idioms learned in one job/project, and not use them in another, for
example.

I'm pretty sure that if you looked at the closed sourced projects that I've been involved
with (i.e proprietry systems), you would find code produced by individuals that was
somewhat similar to the sort of code that they had produced for other projects...
belonging to another company with a different copyright.

Because the Linux development process is so open - that it is almost the best process
that I've come across for ensuring that blatant code duplication does not exist - it
would be too easy to it do be discovered. In a closed system there would be much less
risk of discovery.

Of course, the big risk for Linux is because the code is open it is easy for someone to
find "patterns" or areas of commonality...

I'm pretty sure that what SCO has found, if anything, is pretty much likely to be the
result of people simply applying the lessons, techniques etc. that they have acquired
during the course of their careers to problems in the Linux kernel.