Interview: SCO's Chris Sontag (vnunet) [LWN.net]

vnunet interviews Chris Sontag, the SCO vice president in charge of the whole "SCOSource" initiative. "Finally. Somebody raised a possible problem that you yourselves distribute the infringing code under the GPL licence. Do you see that as a problem from your point of view? No we do not, because you do not have an infringement issue when you are providing customers with products that have your intellectual property in them." But you may have a GPL issue. (Thanks to Joe 'Zonker' Brockmeier).

to post comments

Interview: SCO's Chris Sontag (vnunet)

Posted May 12, 2003 19:27 UTC (Mon) by bertox (guest, #11146) [Link] (3 responses)

As the poster implies, SCO isn't infringing the GPL by bringing suit, but they sure seem to have given up the right to any royalties. They don't seem to have wrapped their brains around the fact that once they have distributed their stuff under the GPL, they can't go back and say, "Hey fellas, we were just kidding about that license thing. Now we want everyone to please destroy any copies they may have . . ."

We may finally be getting the long-awaited test of the GPL, if IBM decides to go that route in their defense.

I can just see the headlines coming this summer: "SCO drops IBM suit, Sues David Boies instead"

-bertox

SCO and the GPL

Posted May 12, 2003 19:42 UTC (Mon) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link] (2 responses)

Actually, I meant to say the complete opposite. The fact that SCO is releasing code under the GPL now does not invalidate any agreements it had with IBM before. If IBM illegally disclosed proprietary code, it remains in trouble.

On the other hand, if SCO is bundling code that (it claims) is proprietary as part of a GPL-licensed product, then SCO is likely in violation of the GPL. Should SCO try to reclaim that code or take action against others who have distributed that code, the company may well find itself on the wrong side of the first big GPL lawsuit. That could be fun...

SCO and the GPL

Posted May 12, 2003 21:47 UTC (Mon) by dthurston (guest, #4603) [Link] (1 responses)

I agree that if IBM illegally disclosed proprietary code, it remains in trouble. However, any code that is in the Linux kernel is now being distributed by SCO; if any of it is actually owned by SCO, then it must be now legal to redistribute it, since, by the very act of distributing code licensed under the GPL, you agree to allow for redistribution.

If SCO has obligations to a third party on any purported code of theirs in the kernel, then they might be violating the GPL, but I don't see any way they could prosecute some redistributing their kernel ersion for violating their own copyright.

SCO and the GPL

Posted May 12, 2003 22:44 UTC (Mon) by iabervon (subscriber, #722) [Link]

The other issue is that, if SCO is saying that they can distribute Linux because they own the IP but nobody else can, because it infringes SCO's copyright, then SCO is putting additional restrictions on their distribution, which violates the GPL (they might be offering the source, but not under the GPL), and anyone whose works were only available to SCO under the GPL can then sue SCO. Of course, into this category would fall some important organizations, including IBM, who would probably be happy to countersue at this point.

Of course, this situation would be pretty obvious to lawyers, so I doubt that SCO will walk into it in any official way. But it does pretty much remove the possibility that they'll go after Red Hat (e.g.) unless Red Hat never got a copy of Caldera with the important bits in it.

Interview: SCO's Chris Sontag (vnunet)

Posted May 12, 2003 19:46 UTC (Mon) by slf (guest, #11147) [Link]

Toward the end of the interview, it seems this guy has a problem with the kernel itself. Who would they sue then? Linus?
If I was SuSE I'd be pretty mad after this interview gets some eyes on it.
And then, they basically say they are the only ones that can use the kernel because their IP is in it. What a coup!

Interview: SCO's Chris Sontag (vnunet)

Posted May 12, 2003 22:20 UTC (Mon) by NerdlyMcGeek (guest, #8453) [Link]

More of the same inuendo and BS with no substance to any of their accusations. Do these fools actually beleive they have a chance of surviving in tech following this nonsense? I'm happy to report migrating another POS system that was SCO based to Linux.... I put COP on the old box for them as they needed a router as well... What a great day...

Interview: SCO's Chris Sontag (vnunet)

Posted May 12, 2003 22:46 UTC (Mon) by jre (guest, #2807) [Link] (1 responses)

Of particular note were Sontag's comments regarding IBM's legal filing rebutting the SCO complaint:

"They really did not make much of a response. ... There is no credible defence to any of the arguments and claims we made. We expect and feel we have strong evidence to support the claims we have made."

Unfortunately, the interview was truncated. Mr. Sontag went on at length as to the weakness of IBM's defense. Some of his other remarks included the following:

"Don't repeat the lies of the liars. As our leader Darl McBride said, God is grilling their stomachs in hell. I think we will finish them soon."

and

"The Linux infidels are committing suicide by the hundreds on the gates of Lindon, Utah."

IBM had no comment in response.

Interview: SCO's Chris Sontag (vnunet)

Posted May 13, 2003 14:43 UTC (Tue) by Baylink (guest, #755) [Link]

> As our leader Darl McBride said, God is grilling their stomachs in hell. I think we will finish them soon.

Hey, that's a great quote.

Sure wish I could get that ... printed on, say, a barbecue apron.