Maybe SCO had a point

Maybe SCO had a point

> Just the opposite, actually. If SCO showed the code they would be identifiying the IP they claim ownership of in order to mitigate their damages as required under law.

And that's in fact one of the key points that Prof. Moglen is making - they should absolutely go after the infringers - Linux distributors. Just imagine the impression of seriousness that the judge will get when it is found that no such thing was ever done. They are threatening users with infringement lawsuits (where majority of them cannot be infringers anyway, given they only used the software, not copied, distributed etc.) and the real infringers are continuing to press thousands of CDs daily, allowing downloads from Internet sites and so on. And they infringed millions of times in the past too.

That's why their case looks flimsy. They are just not doing what anyone that has their copyrighted material infringed upon would do. I have no idea what kind of legal strategy that is, but is sounds outright stupid.

And the nonsense about the code being secret is simply idiotic. How can something be secret when everyone has a copy of it?