Microsoft still comes out ahead (Score 2, Insightful)

Even if the SCO's copyrights are ruled invalid, Microsoft still purchased a license from SCO. Considering Darl's claims that SCO owns "millions of lines of code" in the Linux kernel, couldn't Microsoft take this as an arguably legal way to circumvent the GPL, and pillage code from the kernel? If they were confronted about using the GPL'd kernel code in their proprietary products, Microsoft could say that they purchased the license to use the code in good faith, and "didn't know" that SCO didn't own the code. Scary...