Eldred has nothing to do with sco's position, except outside the courtroom.
If you write code and incorporate it with GPL code, you contractually agree to the GPL, and to the copyright rights and restrictions contained within the GPL.
That's it. It's that simple. IBM, copy and paste above into your response filings to the GPL portion of the complaint.
If the above is not true, then artists can't transfer their copyrights to the MPAA/RIAA.
This appears to be a cover for attacking the GPL, and not having it thrown out immediately, and not being charged with bringing a case without legal grounds/having to pay defendant's legal fees. Further, without attacking the GPL, the court won't parse the millions of lines in linux that sco claims belongs to them. So if they even get that far, the court will let sco cherrypick some code, then IBM will destroy them by showing it in BSD or that sco released it previously, and there is no case.
The attack on the GPL is necessary for pre-trial publicity and raising funds (and for the cheerleading proprietary coders/companies that are quaking in their boots over their future thanks to the GPL). That's it. I just didn't expect their arguments to be so weak, and for them to publicize it prior to trial.
In the months ahead we'll post a series of letters on the SCO website (www.sco.com).
Sounds like pump and dump (and stock price maintenance) to me, but that's just an opinion...
Groklaw must be doing cartwheels over this latest dribble from sco. Can't wait to see the response<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
What a weak argument
Posted by: Fonze on December 05, 2003 05:54 AMIf you write code and incorporate it with GPL code, you contractually agree to the GPL, and to the copyright rights and restrictions contained within the GPL.
That's it. It's that simple. IBM, copy and paste above into your response filings to the GPL portion of the complaint.
If the above is not true, then artists can't transfer their copyrights to the MPAA/RIAA.
This appears to be a cover for attacking the GPL, and not having it thrown out immediately, and not being charged with bringing a case without legal grounds/having to pay defendant's legal fees. Further, without attacking the GPL, the court won't parse the millions of lines in linux that sco claims belongs to them. So if they even get that far, the court will let sco cherrypick some code, then IBM will destroy them by showing it in BSD or that sco released it previously, and there is no case.
The attack on the GPL is necessary for pre-trial publicity and raising funds (and for the cheerleading proprietary coders/companies that are quaking in their boots over their future thanks to the GPL). That's it. I just didn't expect their arguments to be so weak, and for them to publicize it prior to trial.
Sounds like pump and dump (and stock price maintenance) to me, but that's just an opinion...
Groklaw must be doing cartwheels over this latest dribble from sco. Can't wait to see the response<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)
#