SCO Weekly News

Posted Feb 20, 2004 5:32 UTC (Fri) by Duncan (guest, #6647) [Link]

> Can anyone comment on whether or not the users
> of Linux have the basis to sue or counter-sue SCO?

Most definitely, IANAL here, but three observations from my following of
the case..

1) Currently, it would seem end users don't have much, since even the Red
Hat case is being held up while the judge decides whether they have grounds
to sue, allowing the case to continue, that despite all the evidence that RH
and RH users were indeed rather directly in SCO's sights. Given how
directly RH is involved, end users, with the possible exception of anyone
who's directly been a recepient of one of the SCO threat letters, wouldn't
seem to have much to go on.

However, that leads us to:

2) Current status would apparently change if SCO actually DID start sending
out general end-user threat letters. A number of Linux developers and others
with copyrights licenced under the GPL that SCO appears to be violating,
have threatened legal action if that were to occur, and that has been named
as one of the reasons SCO may not have chosen to follow thru on its promises
of sending out the general-scope demand/threat letters, but has limited them
to a far smaller scope -- generally that of users which already have some sort
of contractual relationship with SCO. It would seem that SCO's current
actions of talking it up to the press and anyone that will listen, while not
actually following up in the legal arena, falls under general freedom of
expression rules, at least here in the US, and is thus not legally actionable,
again, the thing holding up the Red Hat suit.

Note, however, that even in that case, developers would have a FAR stronger
legal case than ordinary end users. Basically, direct written end-user threats
on the part of SCO would move everybody's legal interest up one notch. The
RH case would then have solid evidence upon which it should be able to
proceed. Developers would then be in RH's current position, roughly, with a
fairly strong case but still some question of legal standing. And end users
would be in developer's current position, a case that could be argued, but
doubtful legal standing, except possibly in the fairly limited area of defensive
proactive action. Even there, however, most courts wouldn't advance the
case, pending resolution of cases further up the chain.

However, that "here in the US" reference from two paragraphs up, points to:

3) The above observations are limited to the US legal scene. As the German
"put up or shutup" case, preventing SCO from making the wild claims there
that they have in the US, and the Australian CyberKnights case under similar
circumstances now developing, have demonstrated, "victim's rights" have a
stronger weight relative to "free expression" in many areas outside the US. In
these areas, as the developing Australian CyberKnights case is starting to
demonstrate, end users might have current standing.

That's how I see current status re end user and developer rights, anyway,
based on my following of the situation to date, again, just as an interested
Linux user and hobbyist developer myself, with no specific legal training, only
the ability to read reports of developments as presented in the press
(including groklaw and lwn), and common sense.

Duncan