Linked by Roberto J. Dohnert on Tue 10th Jun 2003 01:06 UTC
On March 7th 2003, the SCO Group filed a lawsuit against IBM for misappropriation of tradesecrets and contractual agreements. The scope of SCOs complaint is that IBM introduced parts of Unix System V and Project Monterey into the Linux kernel. Project Monterey was a effort to port IBM's AIX 5L onto the Intel Itanium platform, IBM withdrew from that project for reasons unknown according to the press, I believe that it was because the Itanium is a bomb. 
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Serious question:
The NDA basically states if asked the signer can only say " Yes there is common code " or " no there is not any common code"
Followed by:
"If everything SCO showed me today is true, then the Linux community should be very concerned," said Bill Claybrook, research director for Linux and open-source software at the Aberdeen Group (Boston)."
Does this mean that Claybrook is in breach of the NDA, or was the analogy just an over-simplification?
Now, there is a very important point raised in the article; AFAIK (at least, it is this way in Oz), the Burden of Proof rests solely on the Plaintiff! SCO can say whatever they like, but if they cannot prove it, then there is no argument!
If they do offer proof, and that proof shows that it was copied without their consent (ie, not by one of their own developers) then that is when the defendant must respond to the claims. Of course, if it wasn't IBM, then they kind of kills the argument...
<shrug> Who knows - IBM has big pockets, I guess, so they must be the best ones to sue. I'd be feeling afraid if I was the developer who added the unauthorised code, however, as realistically, the only real legal action will be against them (or their employer). A billion dollars? Yikes!