Linked by Eugenia Loli on Tue 18th Nov 2003 20:33 UTC, submitted by Alex Alvarez
SCO, Caldera, Unixware "Since they cannot show infringement of SCO Unix code, SCO now plans to challenge the 9-year-old settlement between AT&T and BSD. If it can successfully do that, then its claims that Linux contains tainted code can be substantiated. If it can't, SCO is dead meat." Says NewsForge. *Updated*
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
by Anonymous on Wed 19th Nov 2003 00:22 UTC

I've been reading "Open Sources", and there is a chapter by Marshall McKusick (BSD Unix). A section talks about a settlement between Novell (who owned USL which was a branch of ATT dealing with Unix stuff) and BSDI).

The pertinent part of the section is:

"Soon after the filing in state court, USL was bought from AT&T by Novell. The CEO of Novell, Ray Noorda, stated publicly that he would rather compete in the marketplace than in court. By the summer of 1993, settlement talks had started. Unfortunately, the two sides had dug in so deep that the talks proceed slowly. With some further prodding by Ray Noorda on the USL side, many of the sticking points were removed and a settlement was finally reached in January 1994. The result was that three files were removed from the 18,000 that made up Networking Release 2, and a number of minor changes were made to other files. In addition, the University agreed to add USL copyrights to about 70 files, although those files continued to be freely redistributed."

Once an agreement has been reached by two parties, surely one party cannot retry a case? (unless the other party has breached the terms of the agreement).

This means:

(i) that SCO are unlikely to have a case, and are unlikely to even be able to begin one. However, it would improve their stocks...

(ii) If their case depends upon BSD being found in breach of some agreement, Linux must therefore be clean. It uses BSD code in places (which properly adheres to the licensing - credits are given where they are required), but SCO have realised that despite all this "spectral analysis", Linux does NOT infringe SCO SysV code outside of what came from BSD. Which of course was released under agreement.

Is there any case? Doubt it.