What the hell is the point of all this insane lawsuits back and forth. I can understand if Linux were a licensed source app that actually made money in the sale of itself.... but Why would any media outlet with understanding of the OSS movement publish this rubbish.
Linus torvaldis has been indirectly threatened for *violating software patents.* Patents SCO doesn't own directly.
Not too long ago, you could even get a CD from SCO that contained linux code don't believe me? The Wayback machine doesn't lie. Not even considering the fact that they released Caldera linux, were a corporate sponsor of "Linux International" and were a proponent of Open Source.
They are now taking a backflip and pointing fingers at EVERY linux vendor, user, distributor, and coder. How can they even begin to imagine such a far leap from their original thinking?
They released OpenLinux (aka Caldera linux) under the caldera systems moniker as far back as 98. Who would even imagine they were going to implicate thousands of people in a worldwide conspiracy to undermine a patent on a technology they own. And then not even look at their own coporate history?
The GPL entitles someone to use code, only if they release anything that they modify for their, or anybody elses use. Caldera was a modified version of linux, whether or not they modified the linux kernel, they released the kernel on a cd with the source to the kernel included.
Now, as anyone who has sifted through the un-ending kernel knows, just like every other GNU project the GPL is attached to every part of it. Here's the funny part, SCO released cds that said they had no right to charge licensing for things. Then 1-2 years later they came out demanding IBM pay for the licenses they gave away via copyleft (aka gpl.)
Now the breach of contract is another issue, and was probably their *fallback* if a buyout did not occur. Why do I say this? Because from the stupidity and the rushed manner SCO has put their claims forth.
Anyone who has worked for IBM will tell you their run audits looking for exactly what SCO claimed was in existence: (obfuscated, copied, stolen, whatever) code in the Linux OS. Now, linux defines 1 thing, and 1 thing only: the kernel. The myriad of other programs released with linux are under many DIFFERENT licenses, some are GPL'd some are BSD'd some are *free* (as in free to do whatever you want, except sell.)
Depending on the distribution you have different *pieces* of the operating system which come from different places. Some Linux operating systems (such as RHLinux) are 100% open source, if you even think of *tainting* your kernel with non-OSS code, it warns you first. Others are not so strict, and include what they believe are the best options for their audience.
Some operating systems based upon the linux kernel (linux like, or true linux) are so small, they can fit in 16mb (perfect example being the ever popular sharp zaurus) some are even smaller still, and nearly re-written completely for optimization on the various processors that are available for Embedded systems.
I can't begin to explain my outrage at the SCO group for their dangerous, slanderous finger pointing. Why do I say slanderous? SCO claims that if the Linux community were to know of the offending code in Linux, that it would be removed. Before I go bald from all this stupidity lets break this down:
- 1) Caldera was a Linux release from SCO group.
2) SCO claims 20 years of Unix & Linux experience.
3) SCO WAS a corporate sponser of "Linux International"
4) SCO doesn't own anything, except the right to skim off the top of Novells licenses.
5) SCO is defaming linux with unbacked claims.
6) SCO has changed their claims more than twice.
Now, I can understand why SCO doesn't want "offending" code removed, (so they can start shoving licenses down the throats of institutions already using *their* code.) But what it does mean, is SCO group does NOT STAND FOR FREE SOFTWARE. NEVER HAS, NEVER WILL.
Someone, PLEASE, PLEASE pick up on the Caldera OpenLinux angle and publish the SCO stupidity, and liabel.