Linked by David Adams on Wed 20th Aug 2003 16:26 UTC, submitted by fsw
SCO, Caldera, Unixware The first publicly released sample that The SCO Group claims was improperly added to the Linux source code has every right to be in Linux, according to open-source advocate Bruce Perens. In analysis that he's published on his web site, he notes that the code in question is copyrighted by AT&T, but has been released under the BSD license...twice! See tecChannel and lwn for an overview. In other SCO News, McBride has stated his intention to start lawsuits against "illegitimate" end users of the Linux OS.
Order by: Score:
v Spelt wrong
by JLS on Wed 20th Aug 2003 16:45 UTC
SCO's Evidence Hasn't Been Seen Yet
by Foo on Wed 20th Aug 2003 16:45 UTC

Huh? This is only a single code snippet. How can Perens draw that conclusion when he hasn't seen the rest of the code that SCO claims was infringed? This seems like a pretty weak argument.

re Foo
by Anonymous on Wed 20th Aug 2003 16:52 UTC

>Huh? This is only a single code snippet. How can Perens draw that conclusion when he hasn't seen the rest of the code that SCO claims was infringed? This seems like a pretty weak argument.<

Well if that snippet of code was the best they've got, they've got nothing.

re re Foo
by Anonymous on Wed 20th Aug 2003 16:54 UTC

Nobody said it was the best they had. But the reaction from the SCO spokesperson certainly lends itself to the idea that they didn't realise this is Open code.

Yes, it seems to be a large leap of logic
by Ressev on Wed 20th Aug 2003 16:57 UTC

It would be good if there was a better sample, or the whole presentation. The conclusion Parens' makes is only true if the remaining code SCO lays claim to is like this one representitive sample out of hundreds. The smoke and mirrors trick can work, if SCO gets enough people to believe them *before* the trial. It is a matter of people making facts available to all, some of which are tight under SCOs control.

Ahh well, we shall see won't we?

re re re Foo
by Foo on Wed 20th Aug 2003 17:02 UTC

Nobody said it was the best they had. But the reaction from the SCO spokesperson certainly lends itself to the idea that they didn't realise this is Open code.

At best, it applies to this single snippet of code. Perens hasn't proven his case: There's a whole pile of code that has yet to be examined.

Legal Fees vs. Just buying SCO out...
by BP on Wed 20th Aug 2003 17:05 UTC

And IBM is still very quiet...

v Go SCO!
by Martin on Wed 20th Aug 2003 17:05 UTC
open for more suits?
by HunterA3 on Wed 20th Aug 2003 17:06 UTC

SCO, though, was steadfast. "Their assertions are incorrect. The source code is absolutely owned by SCO," said Chris Sontag, a company spokesman.


Does that mean SCO is claiming ownership to BSD code or does that mean that this opens the door for BSD providers to file a suit of their own against SCO?

Your Out In Full Force Today
by Anti Shill on Wed 20th Aug 2003 17:06 UTC

The code is code that SCO put on display to PROVE their case to people. They have no case and the whole world knows it.

What is it with these people?
by Darius on Wed 20th Aug 2003 17:07 UTC

Even if hell were to freeze over and SCO gets what it wants, would you really want to be the company responsible for putting Linux and/or the GPL out of commission? Do that, and I'm sure people will be lining up at your door to do business with you and line your pockets - NOT!!

On the other hand...
by Ressev on Wed 20th Aug 2003 17:10 UTC

As a sample of what they claim, it does lend doubt to the validity of SCO's remaining claims of infringement. If, after all this time of keeping the offending code in the dark, they have not properly analyzed their own code, it would be surprising if there were not more instances of pre-SCO code.

But that in no means excuses the case from court. If they have enough genuine offending code they can claim their prize - albeit greatly reduced since much of their damage claims may rest on code like this.

v Re: Go SCO!
by Anonymous on Wed 20th Aug 2003 17:11 UTC
BSD...
by Martin on Wed 20th Aug 2003 17:12 UTC

So BSD is stealing code from SCO as well??!! I used to have respect for BSD since they basically do free programming for corporations. However if they're stealing code too, THEN DOWN WITH BSD!!! Just use Windows XP...

Re: Foo
by luckierthanpozzo on Wed 20th Aug 2003 17:13 UTC

Perens is talking about the specific code in question. His theory is that if this is the best they've got then their case is unlikely to fly... They could have at least tried to encrypt the useless comments instead of font replacement. Anyway, the font replacement itself doesn't put them in a terribly good light considering that it wasn't obfuscating any source code at all; unfortunately only the forums in the geek sites (slashdot, lwn, osnews etc etc) have pointed to that fact. And, as a lot of people also pointed out, a section of the code was faulty and couldn't be compiled. If anybody needed any proof that there was "something rotten in the state of Denmark"...

@ Martin
by The Pessimist on Wed 20th Aug 2003 17:14 UTC

Not that I'm a fan of Linux (quite the contrary), but what the f*** the "anti-Americanism" as ANYTHING to do with the current subject?

RE: GO SCO! by Martin
by Troll Sniffer on Wed 20th Aug 2003 17:14 UTC

Martin wrote:

"Linux has been nothing but bad news for the computing industry. Poor quality software, plagarist coders, security problems, and anti-Americanism plague the Linux community. Even if SCO's claims hold no merit, I still hope they win just so our world can be rid of open source."

If you're gonna troll, Martin, you're gonna have to be a lot more subtle than this. Your troll doesn't pass the smell test.

Re: The Pessimist
by Martin on Wed 20th Aug 2003 17:15 UTC

Read some of the stuff on www.gnu.org. They want to destroy the commercial software industry, and in general they are quite anti-business. So consider SCO's lawsuit to be the revenge of the righteous patriots who do not want to see all our jobs moved to India.

re: all y'all
by dabooty on Wed 20th Aug 2003 17:17 UTC

"However if they're stealing code too, THEN DOWN WITH BSD!!! Just use Windows XP..."

Microsoft Corp got busted for incorporating stolen code in internet explorer, and that has been proven allready. How about you stop offering closed source as a solution to IP theft and face the fact that there is code theft in closed source too

Re: Martin
by luckierthanpozzo on Wed 20th Aug 2003 17:19 UTC

How about visiting this link, Martin?

http://slashdot.org

You'll find a very nice story about SCO and Samba (an open-source project in case you didn't know).

SCO can kiss my white hairy ***
by Nicholas James on Wed 20th Aug 2003 17:19 UTC

SCO is just like a bratty little kid that won't shutup. Come on, SCO doesn't realy have a case.

v Re: dabooty
by Martin on Wed 20th Aug 2003 17:21 UTC
Who cares about SCO/Linux
by Segway Speed on Wed 20th Aug 2003 17:27 UTC

Windows has been nothing but bad news for the computing industry. Poor quality software, plagiarist coders, security problems, and monopolistic behavior plague the Windows community. Even if Sun's claims hold no merit, I still hope they win just so our world can be rid of commercial software.

For clarification
by Jason on Wed 20th Aug 2003 17:27 UTC

Perens is rightly pointing out that the code SCO displayed as stolen in this instance is NOT stolen. In fact, he pointed to how THIS code has been licensed in the BSD/MIT style twice in the past.

Now, you cannot draw the conclusion that all the code is free of IP theft, but SCO certainly weakened its case by displaying code that is not IP theft.

In regards to the related story, SCO going after linux users: HA! That is going to be funny to see them try and strong arm people into buying a license. I can just imagine the sheer number of counter suits placed by end users. I can't wait until this blows up in their faces.

v Martin, you are either 13 or a moron
by Jason on Wed 20th Aug 2003 17:30 UTC
Crumbling down
by Aki on Wed 20th Aug 2003 17:37 UTC

One easily gets the picture that people in charge at SCO have little (if none at all) information what their own company has been up to in the past. They also do not seem to know the history of the products that they have bought from other companies. The lines of code they presented were of course just a hint of everything they claim to own, but to select an example that bad at the moment like this is really a sign of true ignorance.

The people currently running SCO seem to be a bunch of opportunists that have jumped into promising conclusions too fast and do not find their way out of their own mess anymore. One could pity them unless they were so greedy.

bla bla bla
by Anonymous on Wed 20th Aug 2003 17:38 UTC

"However if they're stealing code too, THEN DOWN WITH BSD!!! Just use Windows XP..."

Microsoft has stolen code in the past too. This was prooven several times (before court and behind).

Viva Las Vegas
by Anonymous on Wed 20th Aug 2003 17:50 UTC

-HP pulls out,
-Intel pulls out,
-Daivid Biose, your OWN attorney, has "other engagements"
-Slideshow meant to convince the world of your IP claims blows up in your face.





v Microsoft IS anti-american...
by Ronald on Wed 20th Aug 2003 17:53 UTC
v Martin -- Same OSNEWS troll from before...
by BP on Wed 20th Aug 2003 17:55 UTC
You guys just don't get it
by godzilla on Wed 20th Aug 2003 17:55 UTC

Linux is gaining acceptance as an operating system that is useful to people both as a server and desktop. America at the moment is very fortunate that Microsoft is a US company. The software market within the US however is a saturated market for growth you need to be in India, Russia, China, Africa etc.

Outside the US SCO's ramblings have already been thrown aside particularly in Europe. If SCO wins or causes a long running sore in the US then Linux development will continue fast in Europe and the Rest of the world - already next to Redhat SUSE is German and Mandrake is French. Jobs and skills will then naturaly migrate.

You are not at risk from losing your jobs to India if SCO loses but if rather if they win. The status quo of Microsoft is American and everyone runs Microsoft is changing. If you rely on the status quo you will be unemployed.

It is interesting that outside the US people rarely by American cars. They are seen as heavy, slow, unreliable and expensive. The same could happen in the software/operating system marketplace.

Wake up and smell the coffee. Linux is gaining acceptance - relying on the status quo will only see America falling behind.

RE: godzilla
by BP on Wed 20th Aug 2003 17:58 UTC

Well said...
Though, erm... not all American cars are so and so... ;)

----

As for martin: What's so fun about trolling? You actually get a kick outa trolling?

hahaha
by skwirlmaster on Wed 20th Aug 2003 18:00 UTC

Man I knew SCO was full of it, but damn the least they could have done is find some code that is harder to track down, and that actually compiles, and then really encrypt it... SECURITY VIA WINGDINGS ;) hahaha

@Martin: don't you get tired of talking?

@Ronald: Monopolies arn't socialist at all, Governmental Monopolies are very common in socialist countries... even more so in communist countries, but a pure form of capitalism allows for monopolies... Which is why we really arn't pure capitalism... that and the welfare system (Which needs to be overhauled) ;)

RE: godzilla
by Dekkard on Wed 20th Aug 2003 18:05 UTC

I don't think that's the best they have. I'm sure they save the best for the trial, unless they have totally inept lawyers (and I don't think it's the case).

Anyway, demolishing proofs on the open takes credibility from them, even if they are not the best. These articles help, though the case won't be won by them.

(OT)
As for martin: What's so fun about trolling? You actually get a kick outa trolling?

Some trolls get fun when "smash" the "rivals" with unusual phrases that makes it hard to answer them with feasible points, or find flaws in the logic of said "rival" and point them out even if they aren't related to the discussion. That requires a fair level of intelligence.

As for Martin, I have no idea ;)

still the same...
by zeb on Wed 20th Aug 2003 18:06 UTC

Have you noticed that most of the trollers use the same domain : .cpe.net.cable.rogers.com since a couple of weeks. There is just the name that change (Martin, Sherbert...) Wonder if it is the same ? Yes, must be the same moron !

RE:Re: The Pessimist
by Wrawrat on Wed 20th Aug 2003 18:08 UTC

Read some of the stuff on www.gnu.org. They want to destroy the commercial software industry, and in general they are quite anti-business. So consider SCO's lawsuit to be the revenge of the righteous patriots who do not want to see all our jobs moved to India.

What's ironic is that you are in favor of the corporations that are actually sending your jobs to India... They are doing this to maximise profits. Yes, OSS might kill some jobs, but they ain't the real threat.

So consider SCO's lawsuit to be the revenge of the righteous patriots who do not want to see all our jobs moved to India.

Yeah, like Levis that closed American and European factories to make all their clothes in Thailand and Turkey. Another communist company ?

SCO are hypocrites
by Maynard on Wed 20th Aug 2003 18:20 UTC

Yes, why else would they be trying to invalidate the GPL on one hand, and then trying to incorporate Samba3 into their products, which is GPL licensed to say the least.

Talk about being consistent. I do hope IBM is taking its notes down. what does SCO want to do. does it want to steal Samba3 code. If it cares so much for IP, why does it go to license the technology from Microsoft. After all, that is what cross licensing is about.

And for all those zealots who think OSS is about destroying jobs in the US, some of us could actually not care less, about US jobs specifically. We care about the jobs of out own people in Africa here. Companies like Microsoft take little we have and spend it elsewhere anyway. Not that I want people to be out of jobs, but I am sure they can get jobs elsewhere, and not line one capitalists pockets only. It is funny how the most important jobs seem to be the Americans ones for some people. Have you ever thought that those Indians you seem to despise actually have to pay for American software, and their countries will not develop because of it. They continuously have to pay to import software when they could employ their own people to do the job and save valuable foreign currency too.

If that bothers you, then you should maybe call for an end to trade. Or buy Redhat, they are American, and employ Americans.

...............??????????............................
by Ajay S. on Wed 20th Aug 2003 18:28 UTC

SCO asking people to pay up for a code that was released decades ago as open source. And after considering the prices they had quoted!!!!!!! I am dumbstuck

Looks like another covert attempt from Billy and
his team, have fallen thru,,,,,,,,,,


RE: SCO are hypocrites
by peragrin on Wed 20th Aug 2003 18:28 UTC

I agree in almost everything you said. Everything execpt the part about licensing samba from microsoft. Microsoft doesn't own any part of Samba. The Samba Team reversed enginerred the whole thing.

Can an American judge declare the GPL invaild, and release it all under public domain, when the orginial Authors are mostly not American? The Samba team is a great example of that idea.

Re: Peragrin
by Maynard on Wed 20th Aug 2003 18:40 UTC

Everything execpt the part about licensing samba from microsoft. Microsoft doesn't own any part of Samba

No, it doesn't belong to MS, but it essentially provides Windows sharing, which MS "could" provide, if SCO were really interested in running away from the GPL.

Re Martin
by The Pessimist on Wed 20th Aug 2003 19:02 UTC

I think you don't realize how the presence of Linux on the market IS PURELY american : it offer a fair counter-mesure against Microsoft that, without it, would be in even stronger monopolistic situation. And monopolies are the worst ennemies of healthy capitalism, hence the worst ennemies of America.

I use Windows, take often defense of their great product, and I generaly dislike Linux. But I'm a hell thankful of it's existence, cause with that kind of pressure, I know Microsoft will continue to deliver high quality softwares.

v OH NO!!! OSS will destroy America
by Ressev on Wed 20th Aug 2003 19:03 UTC
v RE: You guys just don't get it
by slash on Wed 20th Aug 2003 19:13 UTC
( godzilla, Martin )The sky is falling.
by Anonymous on Wed 20th Aug 2003 19:18 UTC

Do you guys truly believe that killing off GNU/Linux will kill the OSS 'movement', then you are sadly mistaken. Many of the Open source software( apache, perl, gcc, , etc... )run on Microsoft platforms. Not only that but if SCO somehow manages to kill off GNU/Linux( which I think is impossible )there are other OSS Operating systems( and kernels )that can easily fills it's boots, *BSD, and HURD as an example. As far as GNU/Linux being 'Anti-American', there are various developers from around the world including the US, GNU/Linux is a citizen of the world not any particular state guarded by fences and rotweilers. You cannot stop progress you can only hope to slow it down.

Re: You guys just don't get it
by ryan on Wed 20th Aug 2003 19:46 UTC

Good post. You are correct. Microsoft is a monopoly and MS is hurting the US software market, at least for OS and office products.

MS has done more harm than good to the software industry. That $40 billion or whatever their cash holdings are now could be spent creating jobs and innovation and that would be the case if MS's abuse of their monopoly power was stopped.

v @ Slash
by Anonymous on Wed 20th Aug 2003 19:50 UTC
license
by ts on Wed 20th Aug 2003 19:53 UTC

"Can an American judge declare the GPL invaild, and release it all under public domain, when the orginial Authors are mostly not American?"

It will never be public domain. If the license isn't valid then you have the same rights that you would have had without any license, which are none. Normal copyright would apply and you don't have the right to copy or use it.

v RE: @ Slash
by Wrawrat on Wed 20th Aug 2003 20:35 UTC
v RE: GO SCO! by Martin
by Jonas on Wed 20th Aug 2003 20:58 UTC
Flame with facts
by RivieraCadMan on Wed 20th Aug 2003 21:51 UTC

OSS and PS have their place. The problem is that the software we find using as a "standard" is so flawed that people are becomming fed up with paying big money for it. Now I would rather pay $30 for a boxed OS that has a few ruff edges then $300 for one that gives me nothing but headaches and comes with no software. My wife (who I should mention hated Linux when we first got married two years ago) has even switched after I bought a copy of XP Pro for her. She has had so many problems she asked me to load MDK on her machine. No training, no instruction, just a little observation and she is able to do everything she wants 100% MS free. I know this is a little off topic so let's look at some facts for a moment people:

1. SCO's stock has gone through the roof since their announcement.

2. SCO is controlled my Microsoft. (loosely owned)

3. SCO has not produced a single piece of code that proves their case.

4. SCO bought their Unix license from Sun NOT AT&T.

5. MS owns an AT&T License.

6. IBM has been waiting for proof before stepping in.

7. Linus was quoted in saying that if the code did not meet the correct licensing then it will be pulled and rewritten.

8. In China they just passed a law to completely ban MS software because of it's security issues.

9. Linux runs some of the HUDs on Boeing Fighter Aircraft.

10. You can download a copy of the NSA's security hardened Linux from their website. (recommended for state and local governments of the US)

11. There are many proprietary programs that are written and sold for Linux.

12. Yahoo has to run BSD or Linux, they have tried every other industrial operating system and none have been able to handle their loads.

13. China, Germany, Korea, United Kingdom, etc ... have all switched to using Linux because of MS (and I bet their not downloading the ISO's from the internet for free to do it either ;)

14. Finally, and most important, I own two "imports" a Toyota and a Honda. Both made in the US. Not only were they made here, but the T-100 was co-developed with Chevy. We have 4 car manufactorers in our state and they are all of the "import" label. Two of which is a German companys.

I'm not trying to make any point other then some of you need to do some reading before making conclusions. I would buy MS products if they provided me with reliability even if they were more expensive. SCO may have a case (although I don't think they do), but the Linux community can not be bent as easily as you may think.

RE: RE: SCO Hypocrites
by Nonamenobdy on Thu 21st Aug 2003 00:27 UTC

>> Can an American judge declare the GPL invaild, and release it all under public domain, when the orginial Authors are mostly not American? The Samba team is a great example of that idea.

That is an interesting point. If the GPL is invalid, surely that means that Cald^h^h^h^h SCO have been distributing code which they had no licence for. Your software doesn't become public domain just because your licence was invalid.

US laws
by s_d on Thu 21st Aug 2003 00:50 UTC

I'm wondering if racket in US isn't subject of criminal prosecution.
SCO communication with linux users looks exactly as this.

Also it reminds me attempt to get parking fee from place belonging to seom other, or from public place.

Re: US laws
by chemicalscum on Thu 21st Aug 2003 01:17 UTC

"I'm wondering if racket in US isn't subject of criminal prosecution." - RICO: if you live in the US and get a letter from SCO, complain to your State's Attorney-General.

All your jobs will go to India....
by Anonymous on Thu 21st Aug 2003 02:17 UTC

...anyway. What does the GPL have to do with it? They were going there long before the GPL was a pimple on the hair of a flea. In fact, I remember seeing a Computer Chronicles show where the interviewer was talking to an Indian who was very proud of kicking IBM out of India in favor of Microsoft. And they were doing software development there. Very cheaply.

If you don't want all your jobs to go to another country, then don't vote for leaders who put corporations up on pedestals and let them do whatever the hell they want to. Then, your jobs won't all go to India, GPL or no.

The GPL will not be declared invalid.
by Anonymous on Thu 21st Aug 2003 02:23 UTC

If anything, some of the code released under the GPL *may* have to be removed from Linux because it wasn't allowed to be released under that license in the first place.

If you think the GPL could be declared invalid, maybe you should look at the precision with which the GNU project itself manages its supporters' code.

The GPL may be *dangerous* if people aren't careful where they get the code they GPL, but it's not invalid, by any means.

Of course,this is only my opinion, and I'm not a lawyer, nor do I have any nuclear weapons. People with nuclear weapons, lawyers, and big guns can make anything they want invalid.

That's the great thing about America. We can do whatever we want here, as long as we know the right people.

Re: The Pessimist (Martin)
by emey on Thu 21st Aug 2003 02:48 UTC

If there are a lot of posting that solely representing the America, this forum better put a large note "FOR AMERIAN ONLY". I knew that this forum might belong to American but there are readers that not from US. I thought US are fighting for equality but posting like this just show how selfish the Americans are and it ruined all good effort before. Welll... al this are politics and not supposed to make way into tech forum.

By the way, how about the current SCO anouncement, is it OK when considering the legal action by RedHat. I thought the injunction is there already which SCO not suppose to spread FUD on Linux.

RE: Flame with facts
by Richard James on Thu 21st Aug 2003 05:55 UTC

2. SCO is controlled my Microsoft. (loosely owned)

Please back that assertion up

SEC complaint
by Anonymous on Thu 21st Aug 2003 06:55 UTC


If you truly do feel put out and believe the SCO and participating in a pump and dump then I suggest you head over to http://www.sec.gov/complaint/selectconduct.shtml to make a complaint to the SEC. Surely they would investigate if they got enough complaints.

Linux won't be a moving target anymore
by sharpie on Thu 21st Aug 2003 07:25 UTC

SCO and Microsoft will both gain weather SCO wins or not. Once the legal precedents have been created regarding linux and GPL, SCO and Microsoft will be in a better position to figure out how to kill linux!

americans ? ha !
by raver31 on Thu 21st Aug 2003 09:27 UTC

it is true, Americans are all dumb...
they are worried about open source taking jobs away from Americans and giving them to Indians... 45% of Windows 2000 was written in India by Indian programmers. They did it for a fraction of the wages American programmers were looking for. This worked out so well for Microsoft that 83% of Windows XP was coded in India.
Tell me now about your faith in American companies.

@Zeb
by ShawnX on Thu 21st Aug 2003 13:52 UTC

still the same...
By zeb (IP: 62.53.112.---) - Posted on 2003-08-20 18:06:28
>Have you noticed that most of the trollers use the same >domain : .cpe.net.cable.rogers.com since a couple of weeks. >There is just the name that change (Martin, Sherbert...) >Wonder if it is the same ? Yes, must be the same moron !

I happen to be using Rogers High Speed and I don't like to be classified as a troll when I contribute code into the Kernel itself and strongly support OSS/GPL.

RE: Flame with facts
by RivieraCadMan on Thu 21st Aug 2003 15:44 UTC


There are two ways that Microsoft has a hold on SCO. In 2000 it's well documented that Microsoft owned 16% of SCO (I had initually read it was 11%)and controlling stock in Santa Cruz (not sure of the figure here). Microsoft never did much with SCO. When Caldera bought two of SCO's divisions, 28% of Caldera's stock was passed into SCO's hands ( Which would either give Microsoft controlling share or at least a hefty say in the matter ). There has been no documented sell offs since dispite some of the rumors that are floating around the internet. It has also been mentioned (but not confirmed of course )that Microsoft has been infusing SCO/Caldera with money under the cover of a Unix licensing, but has it ever occurred to anyone that MS already has a Unix license in one if not more or it's holding companies. In fact up to 2000 SCO was paying Unix royalties to MS. Remember Xenix, AT&T 16 bit Unix Licensed in 1980 by MS that later became the foundation for NT? MS also supplies a lot of it's technology to SCO group. Last I heard there is quite a bit of MS code in SCO's release. With all of these brand loyalty issues I should also mention the release of the new Storage Server software their releasing next month. I'm not saying that MS really owns SCO, but it's strange that all of this came about the same time MS started talking serious Unix Licensing and the release of a very series server storage solution. ( Where Unix and Linux have excelled ) Oh, I should also mention the new head of the anti-linux group at MS which was formally released last month. So I would say that either MS has "influenced" SCO into this mess, or SCO is bloating its stock purposely for a sellout to MS ( SCOs stock has doubled in the last 3 months with a series of very well timed press releases).

I do have to make a correction to my previous post SCO does own a Sun License, but they also hold an AT&T (1979 16 bit Unix) and MS (16 bit Xenix System V Licensed in 1980 released in '83) license as well.

Quote Bill Gates from E-Week
"""Our innovation reminds people that our operating system is not standing still," Gates said. "Over the next four or five years people will understand more about the intellectual property issues around open source software and Linux and that will address the open ended liability without indemnification for customers. There is going to be some friction around that side of the system."""

On a side note: I live in the US and I could care less if my software was written in Antartica as long as it works when I need it...

re: Flame with facts
by bagdad bob on Thu 21st Aug 2003 15:55 UTC

2. SCO is controlled my Microsoft. (loosely owned)

Please back that assertion up

Check out how much SCO stock MS owns:

http://holdings.nasdaq.com/asp/Form144History.asp?FormType=Form144H...

old info
by sam on Thu 21st Aug 2003 16:34 UTC

Form 144 is a proposed sale ----- Microsoft sold all their old SCO stocks (SCOC) a long time ago. The current SCO (SCOX) is Caldera (they haven't officially changed their name from Caldera to SCO yet).

americans ? ha !
by matt on Fri 22nd Aug 2003 14:40 UTC

--it is true, Americans are all dumb... --

yeah, us americans are so, so dumb. we are all sooooo worried about our jobs going to the wonderful country of india, with all your poverty & disease. makes me wonder just why big american companies just don't pack up and move to that wonderful lice infested land of filth & stench. Gee, if only I were an indian citizen, I wouldn't be so hungry & desperate for work.

--that 83% of Windows XP was coded in India--
well, that explains why smart, innnovative people don't use it.!!