[Talk] Re: [Linux-aus] SCO position, rationale and AUUG

Chris Maltby chris at sw.oz.au
Thu May 22 14:39:38 EST 2003

On Thu, May 22, 2003 at 02:05:03PM +1000, Con Zymaris wrote:
> This is not certain. Various parties within SCO have touted the
> 'stolen source code' line, but the core of the suit seems to
> be about the more nebulous 'misappropriation of trade secrets'.

Nebulous is right. I wonder if there could possibly be any trade
secrets left in Unix after all this time and the publication
of books such as Bernie Goodheart's. Maybe they can show how
copyrighted code has been "borrowed", but I'd be surprised if
there's more than a tiny bit that's arguable. Any assessment
of damage would depend on a measuring the actual damage to SCO
(small) and any exemplary or punitive damages would depend on
a finding about intent.

That brings the whole thing firmly into the world of politics.
The co-incident annoucement of Microsoft licensing Unix from
SCO, supposedly for improvement of its Unix Services for Windows
product, becomes noteworthy in this context. After all, Microsoft
are not neutral when it comes to Linux; and other than in the
fevered dreams of Scott McNeally, Windows vs Unix is no longer
an interesting battle.

I suppose we'll have fun watching it play out in the courts
and possibly create FUD in the minds of would-be corporate
adopters of Linux...


More information about the Talk mailing list