Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 25th Nov 2008 01:50 UTC, submitted by judgen
Permalink for comment 338313
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.





Member since:
2007-02-17
Technically correct.
SCO had complete access to (Novell's) UNIX code, and also to the entire development history of IBM's AIX, and of course Linux code just as everyone else does, and a HUGE incentive to find any infringement.
In over two years of searching, they eventually came up with ... not one line of copied code.
Not one line.
I would conclude then that by far the largest factor that would prevent anyone at all going after Linux for violating UNIX copyrights is the simple fact that Linux code is not a copy of UNIX code.
Linux is a UNIX work-alike, but not a UNIX copy.
Then again ... Windows is a VMS work-alike, not a VMS copy, and yet somehow I never see anyone ever speculating about someone going after Windows for violation of VMS copyrights.
Let it rest. Linux is not a copy of anything. It is legitimately-authored original code, designed to oeprate in a similar way to UNIX. Perfectly legal.
Microsoft will just have to learn to try to honestly compete with something for a change.