SCO owns the World? [LWN.net]

SCO owns the World?

Posted Jun 17, 2003 18:37 UTC (Tue) by zonker (subscriber, #7867)
Parent article: SCO owns the World?

If SCO attempts to press this to its "logical" conclusion, they'll also find themselves staring down the barrel of the combined legal might of Microsoft, IBM, HP, Fujitsu, etc... not a pleasant place to be for a company that will probably burn through all of its cash in a lot less time than it would take for this to wind its way through the courts.

It amazes me how brazen Sontag and Co. are being. I can only hope the payback is just as harsh.

(Log in to post comments)

SCO owns the World?

Posted Jun 17, 2003 18:51 UTC (Tue) by allesfresser (subscriber, #216) [Link]

Of course, if the claims are upheld by some raging maniac of a judge (or more likely, a group of Springer fans for a jury), the free world could be threatened, and good ol' Bill would be forced to buy out SCO to save all the Windows users, and then where would we be...? Truly scary.

SCO owns the World?

Posted Jun 17, 2003 19:33 UTC (Tue) by StevenCole (guest, #3068) [Link]

Thus quoth Chris Sontag:

We believe that UNIX System V provided the basic building blocks for all subsequent computer operating systems, and that they all tend to be derived from UNIX System V (and therefore are claimed as SCO's intellectual property).

I wonder if this includes OpenVMS, Plan 9 and The K42 Project?

In regard to BSD variants, doesn't the outcome of The 1993 USL vs BSDI lawsuit have any bearing in this matter?
It would be ironic if this is what protects the boys from Redmond due to their (alleged) use of BSD code in their TCP/IP stack.

Or will screaming loudly and throwing chairs be sufficient?

SCO owns the World?

Posted Jun 17, 2003 20:42 UTC (Tue) by jeff@uclinux.org (subscriber, #8024) [Link]

Sontag also said that Berkeley "might have" (read: we believe has) broken the terms of
the settlemet agreement from the '93 suit and BSD could be affected as well. He refused
to say Windows was not affected (BSD again, one assumes), and specifically said that MS
has only licensed that API layer.

They are going for broke.
Collective insanity caused by group think would seem to be at fault in SCO's mgmt.
As they keep making these claims, that becomes more and more clear. Just a little
more and they will have blown all the credability they might have started with even
outside the tech sector. At which point it will just be a waiting game as it winds
down... and out. No court is going to let them claim all the IP developed by the
worlds biggest compainies, in the OS space as a whole, across my entire lifetime.

SCO owns the World?

Posted Jun 18, 2003 10:53 UTC (Wed) by fatrat (subscriber, #1518) [Link]

There's nothing alleged (or illegal, or wrong) about MS use of
BSD networking code - it's there in the headers. Though of course
you need to buy something like VC++ to see the headers.

The whole point of the BSD license is that it lets you use
BSD code and then sell the resulting product on.

http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_License

Arthur

SCO owns the World?

Posted Jun 18, 2003 14:56 UTC (Wed) by StevenCole (guest, #3068) [Link]

That may be clear to you, me, Microsoft, and the rest of the world, but apparently the ability of SCO to see things differently is unlimited.

From the Byte article:
Byte: "But I thought that Microsoft had signed a license agreement?"
Sontag: "No, Microsoft merely licensed an 'applications interface layer'."

Maybe they're thinking, "Hey, Microsoft has a lot of cash, maybe we can sue them too!"

Now that that would really be fun to watch. Like a Chihuahua picking on a Pit Bull and a Wolverine at the same time.

SCO owns the World?

Posted Jun 19, 2003 22:12 UTC (Thu) by spitzak (subscriber, #4593) [Link]

The point is that SCO could claim the BSD code infringes their copyright,
and thus Microsoft's use of it is illegal. The BSD license does not
protect against this. Otherwise I could steal that new copy of the Harry
Potter book, publish it on the internet, and say "I put it under the BSD
license" and that would somehow protect me and anybody who read it from
the publisher's wrath.

SCO owns the World?

Posted Jun 17, 2003 21:35 UTC (Tue) by crouchet (guest, #1084) [Link]

I wonder what it would cost IBM to buy SCO. I can imagine MS having some very anxious moments.

SCO owns the World?

Posted Jun 26, 2003 18:23 UTC (Thu) by mmarq (guest, #2332) [Link]

Hey,... though Windows is not a derivative of Unix System V, is a derivative of DEC minicomputers systems (VMS), and though Windows "supposedly" has no other "flavor", what is good for SCO is good for Windows, in the sense that this "Broad Derivative Work Interpretation" has nothing "UMBREACKABLE" that does hamper it from being applied to applications. WHY?... because a "Derivative Work Interpretation" dosent explicitly state that running on a processor protected mode or not makes any difference...
... par example microkernels OSes are mostly, or large parts, "userspace" code, yet the all code is called an OS..
...another example IBM OS/2 WRAP could be a "flavor" of Windows because it takes advantage of core parts of windows, but considering that most if not all runs in userspace, it might be more "APPROPRIATE CALL IT AN APPLICATION".
...so...applications can be throw in the same basket...

"In the end who wins more with all this will be "old Bill's M$", wich as nothing to fear from SCO".

"The only safe chance is for Linux as a non derivative of neither to win all the way, in desktop and embeded".