|| ||Khimenko Victor <firstname.lastname@example.org>|
|| ||SCO can not win "SCO vs Linux" case. Seriously.|
|| ||Sun, 29 Jun 2003 18:32:12 +0400 (MSD)|
I'm looking on "SCO vs IBM" case for some time and every time "SCO vs IBM"
case is discussed like it's "SCO vs Linux" case. But it's not! Even more:
even if SCO will win "SCO vs IBM" case SCO can not do ANYTHING to Linux
(except may be make it illegal to distribute for some time).
How so ? Ok, SCO would like to get license fees from Linux vendors, right ?
SCO is not interested in removing offending code from Linux - they only
want money, right ? Oops. Thay can not have it. No matter what Linus and
IBM done. Even if they own rights for half of Linux's code.
Why so ? Linux's license is GPL. Reread this part of GPL once more, please:
-- cut --
7. If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent
infringement or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues),
conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or
otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not
excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot distribute
so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and
any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not
distribute the Program at all. For example, if a patent license would not
permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive
copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could
satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from
distribution of the Program.
-- cut --
What this means ? This means that even if SCO has some rights for Linux
code (all or some parts of it) then there are ONLY TWO CHOICES:
1. SCO grants everyone rights to redistribute Linux for free (like IBM
done with RCU patents)
2. SCO forbids everyone to distribute linux without SCO's license and
thus makes linux UNDISTRIBUTABLE IS US FOR ALL INCLUDING SCO ITSELF!
There are NO other choices. Even if RedHat or IBM will buy license from
SCO they can not redistribute Linux ! If they'll try then EVERYONE who
EVER contributed to Linux can sue them. IBM, Intel, HP, SGI ...
Oh, of course all those companies can sue SCO for illegal redistribution
once SCO claims are proven :-) Since SCO obviously redistributed Linux
while agreements with other parties made it impossible for SCO to even
show code (or so SCO claims).
Why this side of the issue never discussed ? Why every columnist is
writing about how "Linux community doing nothing" when THE ONLY THING
Linux community CAN DO is to remove offending code and it's not possible
till SCO shows what code should be removed ?
to post comments)