Printable View
Quote:
But according to today's WSJ, quoting lawyer Mark Heise, the GPL is pre-empted by US federal copyright law.
How does that work then? According to Heise, federal law only lets people make a single backup copy of software, and that makes the GPL void under US law.
..........................
Isn't this so much fun? :(
So, should I wait on installing linux on my computers? I have it on one, but I am not gonna pay 699$ when I can get Windows XP PRO for 200..
You'll find that 99% of the users here think SCO has absolutly no case. Do what you want, but (In my recommendation), You shouldn't stay away from Linux because of some claims from some company who has failed to produce any evidence to the public.
I think everyone, including SCO, should wait until the trial is over...around 2006!! :mad:
Hey, cut 'em some slack. At least Caldera took the time to incorporate solitaire into their installer.
Quote:
Originally posted by Akito
So, should I wait on installing linux on my computers? I have it on one, but I am not gonna pay 699$ when I can get Windows XP PRO for 200..
In My Very Humble Opinion...
NO!!!!!!!!!!
Well, you shouldn't install linux if you want to play it 100% safe with SCO, but......
Don't be scared away from linux because of SCO's FUD. Remember SCO makes a product (UnixWare) that competes directly with linux. Scaring people away from linux is a benefit to their Unix business.
Keep in mind SCO has not produced a single thread of evidence whatsoever. They are just making unproven accusations, and people believe them.
I don't understand how SCO could be saying they are going to charge desktop users for linux, when they previously said they were only having a fit over NUMA and JFS, which usually aren't even compiled into any desktop linux kernels.
SCO is AT THIS MOMENT distributing the linux kernel source on their ftp site, UNDER THE GPL. That pretty much destroys their case.
Even if SCO wins, they will only have rights to "their" code, not to the other 99.99% of the kernel or any of the other programs in a GNU/Linux distro.
Sure, SCO has a lot of money, but IBM has even more...
Personally, I am not going to let SCO scare me away from linux.
Major corporations and governments are still adopting linux, in spite of SCO's wild accusations.
This thing is going to go on forever, with an effect of causing many users to stay away from linux because of SCO FUD.
If I claimed I owned the intellectual property rights to the collected works of William Shakespeare, do you think everyone with a copy of Hamlet is going to send me a $700 check?
Just go and install UnitedLinux.... something SCO participates in FYI.
There is no way, SCO can sue you or claim money from you, for a project that they participate in and give away themselves, even if the evidenceless allegations SCO have made had any foundation... which they don't.
In conclusion.
"Four legs good, two legs bad".
Ok, SCO is licensing something it hasn't proven it owns or exists. Can we all do this? I wonder if I say that SCO copied some code I wrote 29 years ago, and that I can prove it, but won't, could I charge $1000 per cpu? I am a hard worker, but if companies are weak enough to give money to SCO on unproven claims, can't we all make a buck? I bet in SCO code there is a set variable statement. I remember using that same exact statement years ago. So SCO copied my statement! I want compensation for all the revenue I lost!!! I coulda been a contender!!!!! Even though my code sucked, I want money!!! I should send out letters to all SCO clients warning tham that if I'm not paid, bad things may happen.
SCO are scavengers, I really hate what they are doing.
Alright, well, just was curious :)
*goes off and installs mandrake*
Your next task is getting me off of windows xp.. that's gonna be hard.. :)
Anyone realize this thread is now 24 pages long?:eek:
it's because we merged every /dev/random SCO thread into one.Quote:
Originally posted by psi42
Anyone realize this thread is now 24 pages long?:eek:
I know....Quote:
Originally posted by Hayl
it's because we merged every /dev/random SCO thread into one.
I just didn't realize how many there were. :) :eek:
I wonder if that's saying something..
This is even longer than the M$ bashing thread!
Someone over at /. raised that point, SCO have the patent for the said code, which is allegedly to do with large scale SMP handling: 32 processors and all that, but it's no big deal.Quote:
Originally posted by swiftnet
Ok, SCO is licensing something it hasn't proven it owns or exists. Can we all do this? I wonder if I say that SCO copied some code I wrote 29 years ago, and that I can prove it, but won't, could I charge $1000 per cpu?
I could send 50 pages of an obscure book written by someone else, to the correct office, and be awarded a copyright even though it's not mine. I wouldn't have a leg to stand on when it came to a court battle, especially not up against IBM's lawers, so the patented code is for the moment just extra FUD leverage.
Another point, the GPL would not stand as a defence for this alleged code if the copyright holder had not agreed to the GPL. Say I reverse engineer XP and submit the code to Linus esq. who then puts it in the kernel, MS could still sue my *** off. It's not completely dead for SCO yet, but it's really just between them and IBM.