[plug] Copy of my response to SCO ANZ, FYI

[senectus]

SCO have said all along that they think that the GPL license is
unenforceable and not a valid license..
Even if they manage to prove that (which I believe is beyond their
lawyers/financial capabilities) then they still have to find a way to
supplant all the coders that DID write their own stuff before they can
demand a license for any products..

Besides that.. THEY contributed to the GPL themselves.. there by
acknowledging its laws and powers..
Its ENRON on a smaller scale.. They're fiddling the market for personal
gain.. and need to be hung, Drawn and quartered.

/rant over :-P


-----Original Message-----
From: plug-admin at plug.linux.org.au [mailto:plug-admin at plug.linux.org.au] On
Behalf Of sscott at iinet.net.au
Sent: Wednesday, 21 January 2004 11:02 AM
To: plug at plug.linux.org.au
Subject: RE: [plug] Copy of my response to SCO ANZ, FYI

The thing that really gets me about this whole fiasco is that even if SCO
could 
prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Linux kernel did in fact contain
SCO 
owned code, it would still be illegal and a violation of the GPL for them to

ask for license fees in this manner.

All they could hope for would be for a judge to stop the distribution of
linux 
until the offending code is removed. Through this action, they are basically

saying that they own *all* of linux and are allowed to relicense it as they
see 
fit. This is a direct violation of the rights of those who actually *do* own

the code, and Im surprised that SCO arent being sued into the ground by
anyone 
who has ever contributed anything substantial to the linux kernel.

> I'm prolly slow and you guys have prolly seen this but Leon's in the
news...
> 
> Aust firm tells SCO to detail evidence
> http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/01/21/1074360802009.html

_______________________________________________
plug mailing list
plug at plug.linux.org.au
http://mail.plug.linux.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/plug