SCO sue IBM re Linux Sys V Copyright. Maybe patent danger later?
tlambert2 at mindspring.com
Mon May 19 23:28:46 PDT 2003
Johnson David wrote:
> On Monday 19 May 2003 10:34 am, Linh Pham wrote:
> > Microsoft has always said that the GPL is viral and has potential
> > effects on companies who use Linux (and other GPL'd software)... this
> > is just another bit that they can carry in their arsenal.
> But it's FUD that will only work against the ignorant. This case isn't
> about GPL infecting a proprietary source base, but rather about a GPL
> source base using proprietary code without permission. The licensing of
> Linux has zero bearing on the matter, the licensing of SCO's UNIX code
> is what matters.
> What if SCO found that Microsoft had used SCO UNIX code in Windows
> Server 2003? Is that any better? Of course not.
SVR4, UnixWare, et. al. have always had Microsoft Xenix code
in them in places, so Microsoft has always had an "out", in
terms of cross-licensing. Clearly, this is just a PR ploy.
Also, Microsoft had an equity stake in SCO at one point, as
a result of SCO having licensed Microsoft's Xenix source code
as part of the basis of SCO Xenix (Microsoft had two different
supported platforms, Intel and 68K; the 68K was an internal
Microsoft product only, and was never sold publically, to my
knowledge). I believe the stake was 20% of SCO. I don't know
if they kept it when Caldera acquired the SCO software group,
More information about the freebsd-advocacy