[Talk] Re: SCO Linux kernel still being distributed

[David Lloyd]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


Con,

> > This is passive distribution.
> 
> Why the differentiation? 
> 
> If they do remove the source package, are we are able to raise that as
> a GPL violation to any effect?

If you modify the source and redistribute it you need to make it
available by reasonable means for 3 years after it...according to the
GPL.

But we'd have to prove that SCO modified the source as opposed to SCO
were just a "mirror". Which is the crux of the problem.

<big snip>

SCO is dead. Unix (tm) is dead. Seriously. WHY THE DIGGINS would you buy
a TRADEMARK Unix when FreeBSD/Linux/NetBSD/OpenBSD will do just as good
a job...

Of course the Unix (tm) holders will fight back. So will Sun, HP and IBM
if they don't manage to position themselves in a position where they're
making profits otherwise.

NONE of the (tm) Unix holders or holders of any sort of Unix (tm)
licences are our friends. They WILL turn on us when the money runs out.

Tough.

It's business.

Get over it.


DSL

- -- 
Who now has the strength to stand against
 the armies of Isengard and Mordor?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/I2/Smk7m2JX6ki4RAt0bAJ922mDGJZkMenb3y127X0SfpgcrmQCgi4jp
vlMrUYk3sgdXd7AjXdKQO2Y=
=Riki
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----