A letter from SGI
Following this occurrence, we continued our investigation to determine whether any other code in the Linux kernel was even conceivably implicated. As a result of that exhaustive investigation, SGI has discovered a few additional code segments (similar in nature to the segments referred to above and trivial in amount) that may arguably be related to UNIX code. We are in the process of removing and replacing these segments." The letter also denies that SCO has any claim to the XFS filesystem.
Posted Oct 1, 2003 18:40 UTC (Wed)
by markhb (guest, #1003)
[Link]
Posted Oct 1, 2003 18:41 UTC (Wed)
by dwalters (guest, #4207)
[Link]
Posted Oct 1, 2003 19:03 UTC (Wed)
by ccchips (subscriber, #3222)
[Link]
...which is why I pray fervently that Red Hat prevails in their SCO suit. Many thanks to SGI for being honest and forthright.
Posted Oct 1, 2003 19:15 UTC (Wed)
by rgmoore (✭ supporter ✭, #75)
[Link] (1 responses)
I found this quote to be particularly interesting:
I really hope that regular news sources pick up on this part of the message. This seems to be the same legal theory under which SCO is suing IBM, and it's nice for somebody to stand up and call it nonsense in public.
Posted Oct 2, 2003 15:11 UTC (Thu)
by southey (guest, #9466)
[Link]
Posted Oct 1, 2003 19:20 UTC (Wed)
by rankincj (guest, #4865)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted Oct 1, 2003 19:50 UTC (Wed)
by TheOneKEA (guest, #615)
[Link] (1 responses)
Thanks very much, SGI.
Posted Oct 1, 2003 21:10 UTC (Wed)
by bajw (guest, #11712)
[Link]
Posted Oct 1, 2003 21:07 UTC (Wed)
by namaseit (guest, #13940)
[Link] (5 responses)
Posted Oct 1, 2003 21:12 UTC (Wed)
by Ross (guest, #4065)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted Oct 1, 2003 21:29 UTC (Wed)
by djabsolut (guest, #12799)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Oct 1, 2003 21:32 UTC (Wed)
by corbet (editor, #1)
[Link]
Posted Oct 1, 2003 22:12 UTC (Wed)
by jonabbey (guest, #2736)
[Link]
If you have a subscription to Byte.com, you can read a piece by Trevor Marshall in which he quotes Chris Sontag making threatening noises about
going after BSD.
Posted Oct 2, 2003 20:15 UTC (Thu)
by oloryn (guest, #7408)
[Link]
There's a Babylon 5 quote that seems quite appropriate at this point: "Only an idiot would fight a war on two fronts.
Only the Heir to the Throne of the Kingdom of Idiots
would fight a war on twelve fronts!"
- Ambassador Londo Mollari of the Centauri Republic Welcome to your kingdom, Darl
Posted Oct 2, 2003 0:49 UTC (Thu)
by jimi (guest, #6655)
[Link]
I've been on the XFS mailing list for some time now and have seen the efforts of those involved to produce a superior product that is completely free of any legal entanglements. As part of that participation, I have become more familiar with XFS' history and how it emerged from a core team at SGI. They are completely correct when they state that XFS is an innovative SGI-created work. Kudos to SGI, both the engineers and executives. Their products are amazing and this forthrightness remarkable.
Posted Oct 6, 2003 7:20 UTC (Mon)
by kostikbel (guest, #15771)
[Link]
Someone with a clue. Will wonders never cease?
A letter from SGI
SGI have acted honorably here. My hat goes off to them.A letter from SGI
Reminds me of the Linus interview where he said that the biggest concern among kernel volunteers about SCO was whether the developers might have done something wrong. A far cry from the way SCO has painted them.A letter from SGI
One Fantastic quote
It may be that SCO is taking the
position that merely because XFS is also distributed along with IRIX it
is somehow subject to the System V license. But if so, this is an
absurd position, with no basis either in the license or in common
sense. In fact, our UNIX license clearly provides that SGI retains
ownership and all rights as to all code that was not part of AT&Ts UNIX
System V.
Yup, makes the derivative code argument rather weak if IBM's license has the same wording.
One Fantastic quote
Yup, thanks SGI and thanks for nothing to SCO for all the help they undoubtedly gave SGI in identifying the code fragments in question.
A letter from SGI
Great job, SGI. It's nice to see that someone else who knows what the hell they're talking about has stepped up to the plate and delivered more evidence to destroy the SCO case. I'm glad that SGI has acted so honorably and made their stance as clear as possible. No doubt SCO will have some kind of official response to this that will try to dilute it, but right now I believe that SGI's letter has added yet another body of evidence that IBM and Red Hat can use.A letter from SGI
SGI has been consistently very good in their dealings with Linux. Years ago, they decided to donate their XFS journaling file system to Linux and have followed through and done so under the GPL. It is one of the filesystems now available on Linux that gives it the 'enterprise class' feature of journaling. If I recall correctly, it was the first journaling file system to be offered to the Linux kernel hackers, predating Ext3, IBM's JFS, ReiserFS, and whatever others there are today.A letter from SGI
They have provided a lot of engineering time to Linux development and have been a conistently solid supporter of Linux, including their numerous contributions the Right Way. Their creation, XFS, is now licensed under the GPL. They have made other significant contributions, which thay also GPL'd.
Clearly, they "get it" and work hard to do right. A very honorable and respectable company, it seems to me.
Thank you, SGI.
apparently SCO is going to revoke SGI's UNIX lincense on oct 14. SGI says A letter from SGI
litigation is a possibility.
So lets get a run down. Who's going after SCO.....
*IBM - suing for many things including GPL breach
*SGI - not yet but i dont see any other way to resolve this
*RedHat - asked for an injunction last i remember
Wow, and now seeing as how the FSF is cooking something up I dont see
SCO making it out of this alive. IBM is going to tear them open and rip out their
heart, and SGI is gonna pick up the scraps, RedHat will give em a punch in
the gut, and maybe at the end the FSF and others will kick SCO while they
are down. Ahhhh, they decided to fuck with the wrong community.
One thing i wonder about, if they were thinking about going after *BSD. They
somehow convinced a group of morons to invest in this little ploy against linux.
I wonder if their next target was *BSD. Wouldnt surprise me.
Don't forget LUGs in Germany and other places which stopped SCO from spreading more Linux FUD. Also don't forget the shareholder lawsuit against SCO (not related to the Linux events).
A letter from SGI
Do you have a link for the shareholder lawsuit against SCO ?A letter from SGI
You can find references to it in SCO's SEC filings. It's a standard "IPO sleaze" suit from the Caldera days; just about every company that went public in those times (and still exists) is dealing with such a suit. I think it is pretty low on SCO's list of problems at the moment.
Shareholder lawsuit
A letter from SGI
A letter from SGI
I want to emphasize what others have said. SGI really is trying to do the right thing here. Would a dishonest person demonstrate knowledge of possible wrongdoing when facing a lawsuit? SGI is making knowledge free - as it should be. SGI not only investigated and reported on code that was claimed to be infringing, it investigated and reported on its entire codebase and listed any possible infractions whether they infringe or not. SGI is showing true honesty here - the kind of honesty required by open source participants.kudos SGI
Does the letter means that SGI searches for ANY possible copying from SYSV to Linux kernel, or just parts that were contributed by SGI itself ? Can someone ask them directly ?
A letter from SGI