| |||||||||||
Sun Free and Clear?Sun Free and Clear?Posted Jun 17, 2003 16:50 UTC (Tue) by smoogen (subscriber, #97)Parent article: SCO's quarterly report Why do I get the feeling that Sun is the other company that paid up SCO for its license. SCO says clearly that Sun is not on the radar and is 'free and clear' of any lawsuit. Sun's McNealy has begun another one of his 'Use Solaris and forget Linux' kicks... '. Maybe I am getting to cynical over the years.. but Sun seems a lawyer run company that has always wanted to be IBM.. but not gotten there.
(Log in to post comments)
Sun Free and Clear? Posted Jun 17, 2003 17:02 UTC (Tue) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link] If you're suspicious, don't look at this article, or you may get downright paranoid...
Sun Free and Clear? Posted Jun 19, 2003 1:08 UTC (Thu) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330) [Link] It seems that the only other large Unix source licensee is HP, so it would have to be HP or Sun that made the multi-million-dollar payment. There are several Japanese companies who licensed Unix as well, but I can't imagine that it is one of them.
Sun Free and Clear? Posted Jun 19, 2003 9:04 UTC (Thu) by minichaz (subscriber, #630) [Link] Yeah... I would be willing to put money on the "long-time licensee of the UNIX source code" being Sun. I've seen several interviews in which the SCO people have said "Sun's clean" (or words to that effect) where as HP (with HP-UX) has been mentioned as a possible defendent in the future.This could be a big thing for Sun of they play their cards right.
|
|||||||||||