[Talk] LinuxTag.de sicks lawyers on SCO Gmbh. over Linux code claims
chris at csamuel.org
Tue May 27 09:41:15 EST 2003
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Monday 26 May 2003 6:08 pm, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
> Can anybody recall where SCO defended their refusal to say where the
> stolen code was, and how exactly they defended it?
A very interesting development found via slashdot. LinuxTag have decided to
set their lawyers onto SCO by issuing an "Abmahnung" - basically a legal
warning to stop doing something that they feel is banned under Germanys
unfair competition laws. For more details see  at the end of the email.
Quick question - what's an ex-parte injunction ? I know "ex-parte" means "for
one party" in Latin, but what does it mean in legal terms ?
The LinuxTag.de "Abmahnung" requires SCO to either withdraw the claims about
copied code, or make the evidence public, or face the court, with a deadline
of the 30th May.
Here's the text of the LinuxTag.de press release (the english version):
English Version: LinuxTag has given notice to SCO Group GmbH to desist from
unfair competitive practices
Lawyers representing the LinuxTag association have given notice to SCO
Group GmbH to desist from unfair competitive practiices. The notice, dated
Friday, May 23, maintains that SCO Group is sowing uncertainty among the
community of GNU/Linux users, developers and suppliers. "SCO needs
to stop claiming that the standard Linux kernel violates its copyrights, or
they need to lay the evidence for their claim on the table," said LinuxTag's
The association demanded that the German SCO subsidiary retract its claims
regarding ownership of Linux kernel code by this Friday, May 30, or make its
evidence public. "SCO must not be allowed to damage its competitors by
unsubstantiated claims, to intimidate their customers, and to inflict lasting
damage on the reputation of GNU/Linux as an open platform," Kleinhenz
added. Until a few weeks ago, SCO itself distributed the Linux kernel GNU
General Public License (GPL) as a member of the UnitedLinux alliance. Thus
even if SCO owns parts of the Linux kernel, it has made them into Free
Software by distributing them under the GPL.
"This situation illustrates the superiority of the Free Software licensing
model: If a software manufacturer withdraws from the development of
GPL software, its contributions that were published under the the GPL
up to that time remain available to users," said Jürgen Siepmann, attorney
and founding member of LinuxTag. Till Jaeger, Director of the Institute for
Legal Aspects of Free and Open Source Software, agrees: "Companies
see this as an important pillar of investment security."
There's a lot of heat and noise on Slashdot about this, especially where
people don't understand the German law system, so I dug around a bit (thanks
to Google) and found this explanation in English about what exactly an
Here's hoping that SCO will be forced to put up or shut up..
Chris Samuel : http://csamuel.org/ : Melbourne, VIC
Need someone with 10 years of Linux, Unix, Networking
& IT Security skills in Melbourne, VIC ? Email me.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Talk