Subject: Re: Text of SCO's complaint
From: "Karsten M. Self" <kmself@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2003 01:28:49 +0000

on Sat, Mar 08, 2003 at 12:04:40AM +0000, Karsten M. Self (kmself@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
> on Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 03:52:33PM -0800, Brian Behlendorf (brian@collab.net) wrote:
> > > For the complaint, I'll try to pick this apart later, I've only read it

<...>

> As I said earlier:  based on a cursory read, the IP rights claimed seem
> vague at best, and several comments in particular seem to be claims that
> there must have been dasterdlies done by IBM 'coz there's no way
> GNU/Linux could get that good that fast otherwise.

I might add:  a useful synopsis of the complaint is (presumably Jon
Corbet's analysis) at LWN.  I'd recommend it for those who can't digest
the whole thing.  Significantly:

    http://lwn.net/Articles/24747/

    The core of SCO's claim seems to be that Linux could not possibly
    have gotten to where it is now without some sort of divine
    assistance. Consider points 82 and 83:

        Linux started as a hobby project of a 19-year old student. Linux
        has evolved through bits and pieces of various contributions by
        numerous software developers using single processor computers.
        Virtually none of these software developers and hobbyists had
        access to enterprise-scale equipment and testing facilities for
        Linux development. Without access to such equipment, facilities,
        sophisticated methods, concepts and coordinated know-how, it
        would be difficult or impossible for the Linux development
        community to create a grade of Linux adequate for enterprise
        use.

    As long as the Linux development process remained uncoordinated and
    random, it posed little or no threat to SCO, or to other UNIX
    vendors...

    This is an interesting claim. According to SCO, something came along
    which radically changed the nature of Linux development. Given the
    highly public nature of the Linux development process, it should be
    possible to put a finger on the point where that process was no
    longer "uncoordinated and random." SCO, of course, does not mark
    that point in this complaint. 

And hey, Jon:  contract money's just started rolling in, you've got
yourself another subscriber.

Peace.

-- 
Karsten M. Self <kmself@ix.netcom.com>        http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
 What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
   NPR:  Radio for between the ears:  http://www.npr.org/