Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on September 11, 2003 07:54 AM
In all of these things that SCO has done, and said, it has always tried to state that it can not give us the source, weather its due to the fact that is to be used as evidence in court, or that we couldn't remove it all.
I belive in the first response, the one that it is evidence, is not a decent argument, since I am sure, that not all of the infringing code is from IBM, as they have stated. Even if they think they might have more cases that would envolve it, I think that a judge would like to see that SCO made an attempt to deal with this out side of court, other wise, they did not try to deal with the problem. I think a judge might see that action, as a company just wasting time, when it could have fixed this without envolving the courts time.
Then, their later statment, say that it would not be possible for the community to replace all the code. Well, I would like to see the source that is infringing in order to come to that conclusion myself.
Also, with the little source we have seen, it looks as though, alot of it was just stuff that was already released in a different license that allows its use.
I think SCO should just put up the evidence, and let the public now what they feel has been done. Untill SCO shows there hand, they are going to look at them as a really bad poker player. I don't know what they have, if its a dead hand, 5 high, they are in some trouble, but even if its a Royal Flush, which I doubt myself, I find they have not been playing by the rules, and no one knows if they cheated and either planted the cards for the other players, or stole the others cards.
When you play 5 card draw, and you see a man with 7 cards in his hand, I think he is cheating.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
I find that Linus makes a good point
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on September 11, 2003 07:54 AMI belive in the first response, the one that it is evidence, is not a decent argument, since I am sure, that not all of the infringing code is from IBM, as they have stated. Even if they think they might have more cases that would envolve it, I think that a judge would like to see that SCO made an attempt to deal with this out side of court, other wise, they did not try to deal with the problem. I think a judge might see that action, as a company just wasting time, when it could have fixed this without envolving the courts time.
Then, their later statment, say that it would not be possible for the community to replace all the code. Well, I would like to see the source that is infringing in order to come to that conclusion myself.
Also, with the little source we have seen, it looks as though, alot of it was just stuff that was already released in a different license that allows its use.
I think SCO should just put up the evidence, and let the public now what they feel has been done. Untill SCO shows there hand, they are going to look at them as a really bad poker player. I don't know what they have, if its a dead hand, 5 high, they are in some trouble, but even if its a Royal Flush, which I doubt myself, I find they have not been playing by the rules, and no one knows if they cheated and either planted the cards for the other players, or stole the others cards.
When you play 5 card draw, and you see a man with 7 cards in his hand, I think he is cheating.
#