[Talk] Re: [Linux-aus] SCO position, rationale and AUUG
andrae.muys at braintree.com.au
Fri May 23 15:04:28 EST 2003
Luigi Cantoni wrote:
> This certainly has been a great history lession.
> I agree with Enno just a general statement of support and that people
> (organisations) should have nothing to fear.
> Maybe something like because it is open and all code can be seen then
> anyone can easily point to the exact piece and say it is mine. Until
> that is done and proven there is no problem.
> I assume that no one has actually said these 100's of lines of code
> right here are the ones copied from what xxx had.
I was thinking about this issue this morning, and it occurred to me that
there is probably very little to be gained by "expressing support" for
linux. After all, this will hardly surprise anyone. OTOH a press
release accusing SCO of anti-competitive behaviour in refusing to
substantiate their accusations of wrong doing during the development of
the Linux Kernel; Calling on SCO to release specific allegations of
wrong doing, or abstain from vague threats and rumour mongering. One
constructive thing we could do would be to attack SCO's allegation that
the Linux Kernel Developers could somehow "Launder" their code to avoid
the legal challange. That not only is such an accusation of dishonesty
offensive, but physically impossible due to the millions of copies of
the source code distributed in line with Linux's Open Source principles.
P.S. Yeah I always prefer counter-attack to defense... how could you
Andrae Muys But can it generate *quantum* Haiku
<andrae.muys at braintree.com.au> error messages, in Latin, where each
Engineer line of the error message is a
Braintree Communications palindrome? -- Mike Vanier on perl
More information about the Talk