Subject: Re: SCO Releases Linux OS for Itanium 2 (fwd)
From: "Karsten M. Self" <>
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 17:51:41 +0100

on Thu, Apr 17, 2003 at 08:56:41AM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor ( wrote:
> (Jonathan Corbet) writes:
> > > Sounds like someone within SCO's product group didn't get the memo
> > > from legal.
> > 
> > In fact, you really have to wonder what's going on there.  The new
> > announcement brags about all kinds of "enterprise" features - including
> > EVMS and JFS.  It's got all that stuff they say couldn't be there unless it
> > had been stolen from them...
> It's amusing, but there isn't any contradiction.  If the code was
> stolen from them, then they are the only ones with the legal right to
> sell it.  

If they're releasing code mingled with that of others under the GPL
while simultaneously claiming encumberances on same code, I see a world
of problems for them.

> Presumably they have some license on the product which puts
> restrictions on the part of the code they claim to own.  If the suit
> succeeds completely, then SCO could be the only legal Linux vendor.

See above.

> Not that that's going to happen, but it's more or less rational
> behaviour on their part.

"Rational" and "SCO"?  Parse error.


Karsten M. Self <>
 What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
   Kudos to Gateway's Digital Music Campaing & stand against the RIAA.