No, SCO and you are wrong (Score 1)

An offer of indemnification is in no way an admission that a claim is plausible. If anything, it is the opposite.

In the normal course of business, one stands behind one's product by offering an indemnification. In the open source context, HP (but not necessarily Sun, given their relatioship with SCO) is sending a message that it believes that the risk of there ultimately being a problem is lower than the losses it will suffer if its customers don't trust Linux. As a business, the only way that analysis makes sense is if one believes in the integrity of open source.

I shouldn't really say that SCO is wrong; they had it right the first time: if you believe in the product you are selling, and if you believe there isn't a problem with a type of claim, you indemnify. H-P believes.

IAAL,BIANYL