| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Best Defence is Attack : Of course Rebuttals and denials get less coverageBest Defence is Attack : Of course Rebuttals and denials get less coveragePosted Sep 12, 2003 16:41 UTC (Fri) by jhardin@impsec.org (guest, #15045)In reply to: Best Defence is Attack : Of course Rebuttals and denials get less coverage by RobDavies Parent article: SCO's McBride on his open letter to the Linux community (ComputerWorld)
We should challenge them to run ESR's comparator, on their source base, and let it be subject to scrutiny for IP violations.I would wager that this is exactly what is happening, outside of SCO's control. ESR is very likely working with a SYSV licensee (IBM perhaps) who is running the shredder on their SCO code base so that a comparison can be made.
(Log in to post comments)
Best Defence is Attack : Of course Rebuttals and denials get less coverage Posted Sep 12, 2003 17:36 UTC (Fri) by djabsolut (guest, #12799) [Link] Let's up the ante: ESR has been making noises that Something Big (tm) is going be dropped on SCO - my bet is that he (or they, whoever that might be) has found some serious overlaps with BSD source, with the attributions to BSD-folks removed. Other theories ?
Best Defence is Attack : Of course Rebuttals and denials get less coverage Posted Sep 12, 2003 18:11 UTC (Fri) by jhardin@impsec.org (guest, #15045) [Link] That plus "borrowed" Linux code wouldn't be at all surprising.
|
|
||||||||||||