RE: Sco vs. IBM

RE: Sco vs. IBM

[Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky]

> From: miquels@cistron-office.nl [mailto:miquels@cistron-office.nl]
> Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 9:34 AM
> To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: Sco vs. IBM
> 
> In article <20030619141443.GR29247@fs.tum.de>,
> Adrian Bunk  <bunk@fs.tum.de> wrote:
> >There's no license reason today why there are two big desktop projects
> >(GNOME and KDE).
> 
> There is. If you want to develop a commercial application under
> KDE you need to pay TrollTech for the Qt license. Basically
> TrollTech controls all commercial KDE applications.

I'd say that GPL file appended to the dual license
of Qt says otherwise ... but IANAL...

Iñaky Pérez-González -- Not speaking for Intel -- all opinions are my own
(and my fault)

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[Miquel van Smoorenburg]

In article <A46BBDB345A7D5118EC90002A5072C780E0409E9@orsmsx116.jf.intel.com>,
Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky <inaky.perez-gonzalez@intel.com> wrote:
>> From: miquels@cistron-office.nl [mailto:miquels@cistron-office.nl]
>> There is. If you want to develop a commercial application under
>> KDE you need to pay TrollTech for the Qt license. Basically
>> TrollTech controls all commercial KDE applications.
>
>I'd say that GPL file appended to the dual license
>of Qt says otherwise ... but IANAL...

I have nothing against Qt or Trolltech. I just happen to think that
the GPL is a bad license for a core-library (which Qt is for KDE).
But I shouldn't have gone this far offtopic anyway. Sorry.

Mike.

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[Gerald Stuhrberg]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 244 bytes --]

I just have one quick queston while all of you are debating. If how is
it right for SCO to target IBM (or any company for that manner) if the
code doesnt belong to them.

Sorry for the ignorance. I missed something somewhere :/ 

Gerald

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

RE: Sco vs. IBM

[David Schwartz]

> I just have one quick queston while all of you are debating. If how is
> it right for SCO to target IBM (or any company for that manner) if the
> code doesnt belong to them.
>
> Sorry for the ignorance. I missed something somewhere :/
>
> Gerald

	You should really look at the specific claims in the SCO lawsuit if you
want to understand them. Basically, they're saying that IBM violated the
terms of a contract.

	DS

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[Joachim B Haga]

> If so then say good by to KDE sometime soon....

Hardly. Qt on linux/unix/mac is GPL.

And trolltech is 75% employee owned. Canopy has maybe 5%, not exactly
a controlling interest. Trolltech are the good guys, it's not their
fault Canopy has invested in them.

-- 
j.

Re: SCO's claims seem empty

[Paul Rolland]

And if it is only comments, it could be Sco that has taken then from
Linux, without any damage to their code ;-)

Paul

> If it isn't simply carefully doctored choices designed 
> mislead clueless analysts. You are also ignoring at least two 
> other things - code that is common because its from the 
> reference (eg intel locking code) and code from third party 
> vendors legitimately supplied to both Linux and SCO.

Sco vs. IBM

[Martin List-Petersen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 668 bytes --]

Ok .. here we got us a few more articles about the stuff going on. A
friend pointed me at these:

Byte.com states: SCO Owns Your Computer 
http://www.byte.com/documents/s=8276/byt1055784622054/0616_marshall.html
Comment: read and cry (or not ?) :-/

On Linux Planet, they try say "SCO Pulls Trigger, Targets Torvald":
http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/newss/4858/1/

However .. more or less it is about the current way people think about
it.

Regards,
Martin List-Petersen
martin at list-petersen dot dk
--
All things are either sacred or profane.
The former to ecclesiasts bring gain;
The latter to the devil appertain.
-- Dumbo Omohundro


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[Luigi Rosa]

Hello Martin,

Wednesday, June 18, 2003, 7:36:48 PM, you wrote:

MLP> Ok .. here we got us a few more articles about the stuff going on. A
MLP> friend pointed me at these:

I think that this one

<http://www.forbes.com/2003/06/18/cz_dl_0618linux.html>

is very illuminating.



-- 
Best regards,
 Luigi                            mailto:kernel@mail.hypertrek.info

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[James Simmons]

> MLP> Ok .. here we got us a few more articles about the stuff going on. A
> MLP> friend pointed me at these:
> 
> I think that this one
> 
> <http://www.forbes.com/2003/06/18/cz_dl_0618linux.html>
> 
> is very illuminating.

How pathetic!!! He is just like the people who going into stores to stage 
accidents and then sue the store.He makes a living by sueing. I dobut he 
can sue every big UNIX implementor/user. he has to go again SUN, IBM and 
other big names.

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[Rick Franchuk]

On Wed, 18 Jun 2003, James Simmons wrote:

> 
> > MLP> Ok .. here we got us a few more articles about the stuff going on. A
> > MLP> friend pointed me at these:
> > 
> > I think that this one
> > 
> > <http://www.forbes.com/2003/06/18/cz_dl_0618linux.html>
> > 
> > is very illuminating.
> 
> How pathetic!!! He is just like the people who going into stores to stage 
> accidents and then sue the store.He makes a living by sueing. I dobut he 
> can sue every big UNIX implementor/user. he has to go again SUN, IBM and 
> other big names.

In other words:

"Those who can't do, sue."

To be fair though, SCO aren't the only ones suing for a living. Check out
these guys:

http://www.extremetech.com/print_article/0,3998,a=34898,00.asp

Article focuses on the adult industry, but it's easy how this could spill over
to affect anyone delivering any sort of content online. Gotta love our current 
IP laws...

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[Richard B. Johnson]

On Wed, 18 Jun 2003, James Simmons wrote:

>
> > MLP> Ok .. here we got us a few more articles about the stuff going on. A
> > MLP> friend pointed me at these:
> >
> > I think that this one
> >
> > <http://www.forbes.com/2003/06/18/cz_dl_0618linux.html>
> >
> > is very illuminating.
>
> How pathetic!!! He is just like the people who going into stores to stage
> accidents and then sue the store.He makes a living by sueing. I dobut he
> can sue every big UNIX implementor/user. he has to go again SUN, IBM and
> other big names.
>

They forgot INTERACTIVE Unix! This is/was a Kodak Company. When word
gets out, they may even sue Kodak. They claim that any form of
Unix (whatever that is), now belongs to them because one of their
predecessors purchased a license. Get this, it was a non-exclusive
license even!

Maybe they think all Judges are stupid??  Probably not, it's likely
just the death throes of a company that drank a fatal dose of corruption.

FYI, I noticed an unauthorized reproduction of some of my code. It
used a variable, "i", in a "for" loop. Maybe I should go buy a lawyer.
I can show that only persons who had been previously been poisoned
by FORTRAN would ever use such a variable name. This certainly
points to me.

Cheers,
Dick Johnson
Penguin : Linux version 2.4.20 on an i686 machine (797.90 BogoMips).
Why is the government concerned about the lunatic fringe? Think about it.

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[Martin List-Petersen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 589 bytes --]

On Wed, 2003-06-18 at 21:39, Richard B. Johnson wrote:

> FYI, I noticed an unauthorized reproduction of some of my code. It
> used a variable, "i", in a "for" loop. Maybe I should go buy a lawyer.
> I can show that only persons who had been previously been poisoned
> by FORTRAN would ever use such a variable name. This certainly
> points to me.

Eerh .. one stupid question: Who has not used that and in what
programming language was it not used ?

Regards,
Martin List-Petersen
martin at list-petersen dot dk
--
To err is human, to forgive is against company policy.


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[Tom Diehl]

On 18 Jun 2003, Martin List-Petersen wrote:

> On Wed, 2003-06-18 at 21:39, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
> 
> > FYI, I noticed an unauthorized reproduction of some of my code. It
> > used a variable, "i", in a "for" loop. Maybe I should go buy a lawyer.
> > I can show that only persons who had been previously been poisoned
> > by FORTRAN would ever use such a variable name. This certainly
> > points to me.

You forgot the smiley!! :-))

> 
> Eerh .. one stupid question: Who has not used that and in what
> programming language was it not used ?
> 
> Regards,
> Martin List-Petersen
> martin at list-petersen dot dk
> --
> To err is human, to forgive is against company policy.
> 
> 

-- 
......Tom		Registered Linux User #14522	http://counter.li.org
tdiehl@rogueind.com	My current SpamTrap		mtd123@rogueind.com

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[Richard B. Johnson]

On Wed, 18 Jun 2003, Tom Diehl wrote:

> On 18 Jun 2003, Martin List-Petersen wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2003-06-18 at 21:39, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
> >
> > > FYI, I noticed an unauthorized reproduction of some of my code. It
> > > used a variable, "i", in a "for" loop. Maybe I should go buy a lawyer.
> > > I can show that only persons who had been previously been poisoned
> > > by FORTRAN would ever use such a variable name. This certainly
> > > points to me.
>
> You forgot the smiley!! :-))
>

Yah. That's probably why I got a ton of messages asking me to
explain! Some seemed really concerned ;^)=--)



Cheers,
Dick Johnson
Penguin : Linux version 2.4.20 on an i686 machine (797.90 BogoMips).
Why is the government concerned about the lunatic fringe? Think about it.

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[Werner Almesberger]

Luigi Rosa wrote:
> <http://www.forbes.com/2003/06/18/cz_dl_0618linux.html>

"[...] in two other Canopy companies, Troll Tech and Lineo, [...]"

Makes one wonder what else to expect in the future ...

- Werner

-- 
  _________________________________________________________________________
 / Werner Almesberger, Buenos Aires, Argentina         wa@almesberger.net /
/_http://www.almesberger.net/____________________________________________/

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[Richard B. Johnson]

On Wed, 18 Jun 2003, Werner Almesberger wrote:

> Luigi Rosa wrote:
> > <http://www.forbes.com/2003/06/18/cz_dl_0618linux.html>
>
> "[...] in two other Canopy companies, Troll Tech and Lineo, [...]"
>
> Makes one wonder what else to expect in the future ...
>
> - Werner

> "[...] in two other Canopy companies, Troll Tech and Lineo, [...]"
                                         ^^^^^^^^^^
                 I thought this was a joke! There __is__ really
such a company???!! Wonder what they do....., maybe troll this
list... hehe....


Cheers,
Dick Johnson
Penguin : Linux version 2.4.20 on an i686 machine (797.90 BogoMips).
Why is the government concerned about the lunatic fringe? Think about it.

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[Magnus Solvang]

Quoting Richard B. Johnson (root@chaos.analogic.com):
[...]
| > "[...] in two other Canopy companies, Troll Tech and Lineo, [...]"
|                                          ^^^^^^^^^^
|                  I thought this was a joke! There __is__ really
| such a company???!! Wonder what they do....., maybe troll this
| list... hehe....

You could try a search before joking about it. I believe it's this
Norwegian company they write about:

http://www.trolltech.com/

- M

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[jdow]

From: "Magnus Solvang" <magnus@solvang.net>

> Quoting Richard B. Johnson (root@chaos.analogic.com):
> [...]
> | > "[...] in two other Canopy companies, Troll Tech and Lineo, [...]"
> |                                          ^^^^^^^^^^
> |                  I thought this was a joke! There __is__ really
> | such a company???!! Wonder what they do....., maybe troll this
> | list... hehe....
> 
> You could try a search before joking about it. I believe it's this
> Norwegian company they write about:
> 
> http://www.trolltech.com/
> 
> - M

If so then say good by to KDE sometime soon....

{O.O}

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[Magnus Solvang]

Quoting jdow (jdow@earthlink.net):
[...]
| > I believe it's this Norwegian company they write about:
| > 
| > http://www.trolltech.com/
| 
| If so then say good by to KDE sometime soon....

How did you arrive at that conclusion? Do you believe that
SCO will destroy everything and everybody related to Linux
when they can make money by suing them? :)
And KDE is not limited to just Linux.

- M

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[Martin List-Petersen]

Citat Magnus Solvang <magnus@solvang.net>:

> Quoting jdow (jdow@earthlink.net):
> [...]
> | > I believe it's this Norwegian company they write about:
> | > 
> | > http://www.trolltech.com/
> | 
> | If so then say good by to KDE sometime soon....
> 
> How did you arrive at that conclusion? Do you believe that
> SCO will destroy everything and everybody related to Linux
> when they can make money by suing them? :)
> And KDE is not limited to just Linux.

Go back and read the forbes article. That was more or less exactly the point of
that article. 

Regards,
Martin List-Petersen
martin at list-petersen dot dk
--
BOFH excuse #66:

bit bucket overflow

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[Jesse Pollard]

On Thursday 19 June 2003 08:03, Martin List-Petersen wrote:
> Citat Magnus Solvang <magnus@solvang.net>:
> > Quoting jdow (jdow@earthlink.net):
> > [...]
> >
> > | > I believe it's this Norwegian company they write about:
> > | >
> > | > http://www.trolltech.com/
> > |
> > | If so then say good by to KDE sometime soon....
> >
> > How did you arrive at that conclusion? Do you believe that
> > SCO will destroy everything and everybody related to Linux
> > when they can make money by suing them? :)
> > And KDE is not limited to just Linux.
>
> Go back and read the forbes article. That was more or less exactly the
> point of that article.

It was the original reason Gnome was started. Trolltec had released thier
toolkit for "free" but not GPL. They then changed the licence a bit, but I
think they still have some (lot?) control over the toolkit. I believe the
KDE group did start a re-work to implement an independant version, but I
don't know how that went.

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[Thorsten Körner]

Hi
Am Donnerstag, 19. Juni 2003 15:14 schrieb Jesse Pollard:
> On Thursday 19 June 2003 08:03, Martin List-Petersen wrote:
> > Citat Magnus Solvang <magnus@solvang.net>:
> > > Quoting jdow (jdow@earthlink.net):
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > | > I believe it's this Norwegian company they write about:
> > > | >
> > > | > http://www.trolltech.com/
> > > |
> > > | If so then say good by to KDE sometime soon....
> > >
> > > How did you arrive at that conclusion? Do you believe that
> > > SCO will destroy everything and everybody related to Linux
> > > when they can make money by suing them? :)
> > > And KDE is not limited to just Linux.
> >
> > Go back and read the forbes article. That was more or less exactly the
> > point of that article.
>
> It was the original reason Gnome was started. Trolltec had released thier
> toolkit for "free" but not GPL. They then changed the licence a bit, but I
> think they still have some (lot?) control over the toolkit. I believe the
> KDE group did start a re-work to implement an independant version, but I
> don't know how that went.
I think all newer versions of QT are licensed under GPL. And IMHO uses the 
KDE-Project QT-Libs that are 'GPLed', so trolltech can't stop the project 
from using this Libs.

CU

Thorsten

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[jdow]

From: "Thorsten Körner" <thorstenkoerner@123tkshop.org>

> Hi
> Am Donnerstag, 19. Juni 2003 15:14 schrieb Jesse Pollard:
> > On Thursday 19 June 2003 08:03, Martin List-Petersen wrote:
> > > Citat Magnus Solvang <magnus@solvang.net>:
> > > > Quoting jdow (jdow@earthlink.net):
> > > > [...]
> > > >
> > > > | > I believe it's this Norwegian company they write about:
> > > > | >
> > > > | > http://www.trolltech.com/
> > > > |
> > > > | If so then say good by to KDE sometime soon....
> > > >
> > > > How did you arrive at that conclusion? Do you believe that
> > > > SCO will destroy everything and everybody related to Linux
> > > > when they can make money by suing them? :)
> > > > And KDE is not limited to just Linux.
> > >
> > > Go back and read the forbes article. That was more or less exactly the
> > > point of that article.
> >
> > It was the original reason Gnome was started. Trolltec had released
thier
> > toolkit for "free" but not GPL. They then changed the licence a bit, but
I
> > think they still have some (lot?) control over the toolkit. I believe
the
> > KDE group did start a re-work to implement an independant version, but I
> > don't know how that went.
> I think all newer versions of QT are licensed under GPL. And IMHO uses the
> KDE-Project QT-Libs that are 'GPLed', so trolltech can't stop the project
> from using this Libs.

Thorsten, that does not follow directly. You know and I know that when
there is "one way to do something" the code you write and the code I
write without ever meeting each other might have remarkable resemblance
once our preferred formatting differences are ironed out. This has not
stopped SCO from claiming copying by IBM into Linux. (That is a major
laugh, by the way. It is a corporate firing offense.) They can claim
that the KDE people copied code from the QT library rather than fully
and properly recreated it from cold. And who in the KDE world has enough
money to beat someone buying a verdict?

(The word from inside at the coder level of IBM is that you work on
proprietary code or you work on Linux code. Proprietary code does not
leak from one proprietary domain to another or into Linux. It does not
leak the other way. Said leaks are firing offenses. The same happens
at UniSys. My partner has source code for much of XP because he builds
HALs for the ES-7000 etc. He WILL NOT go NEAR the Linux material I
happen to have due to my interests. And I do not discuss any Linux
tricks I note with him. His golden handcuff level income is something
neither of us wish to toss away.)

{^_^} Joanne

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[Adrian Bunk]

On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 08:14:55AM -0500, Jesse Pollard wrote:
> On Thursday 19 June 2003 08:03, Martin List-Petersen wrote:
> > Citat Magnus Solvang <magnus@solvang.net>:
> > > Quoting jdow (jdow@earthlink.net):
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > | > I believe it's this Norwegian company they write about:
> > > | >
> > > | > http://www.trolltech.com/
> > > |
> > > | If so then say good by to KDE sometime soon....
> > >
> > > How did you arrive at that conclusion? Do you believe that
> > > SCO will destroy everything and everybody related to Linux
> > > when they can make money by suing them? :)
> > > And KDE is not limited to just Linux.
> >
> > Go back and read the forbes article. That was more or less exactly the
> > point of that article.
> 
> It was the original reason Gnome was started. Trolltec had released thier
> toolkit for "free" but not GPL. They then changed the licence a bit, but I
> think they still have some (lot?) control over the toolkit. I believe the
> KDE group did start a re-work to implement an independant version, but I
> don't know how that went.

That's not correct.

Qt was pulished under the QPL. The QPL is an open source license. The 
only problems was that the QPL is not compatible with the GPL.

There were copyright problems since some small parts of KDE (IIRC e.g. 
kghostview) contain GPL'ed code not written by the KDE developers.

Since version 2.2 Qt is dual-licenced under both the QPL and the GPL 
(you can choose under which license you want to use it.

Trolltech has the same control over Qt as Linus over the Linux kernel.

There's no license reason today why there are two big desktop projects 
(GNOME and KDE).

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[Miquel van Smoorenburg]

In article <20030619141443.GR29247@fs.tum.de>,
Adrian Bunk  <bunk@fs.tum.de> wrote:
>There's no license reason today why there are two big desktop projects 
>(GNOME and KDE).

There is. If you want to develop a commercial application under
KDE you need to pay TrollTech for the Qt license. Basically
TrollTech controls all commercial KDE applications.

Which makes no sense. You're not at the mercy of Linus or the
kernel developers, neither at that of the KDE developers, but
TrollTech controls the KDE desktop wrt commercial apps.

What if TrollTech decides to only license (or sell) Qt
to, say, Microsoft? What does that mean for, say, the Kompany ?

Mike.

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[Robin Rosenberg]

torsdagen den 19 juni 2003 18.34 skrev Miquel van Smoorenburg:
[snip]
>
> What if TrollTech decides to only license (or sell) Qt
> to, say, Microsoft? What does that mean for, say, the Kompany ?

A link for those that bothered to look at trolltech's site: 
http://www.kde.org/whatiskde/kdefreeqtfoundation.php

Trolltech is doing a great job. QT works and seems to work well by default
in most apps. Linux needs toolkits like that results in well working consistent
apps an not just great screenshots. Trolltech provides that. For free.

-- robin

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[Holger Freyther]

> What if TrollTech decides to only license (or sell) Qt
> to, say, Microsoft? What does that mean for, say, the Kompany ?
>
> Mike.
The KDE e.V. and Trolltech A.S. have a legal agreement. Basicly the last 
version of Qt  will be relicensed to a BSD like license.


regards hOlgAr

-- 
_____________________________________________
Holger 'zecke' Freyther
developer
Project OPIE- the Open Palmtop Integrated Environment
http://opie.handhelds.org | http://www.opie.info (german)
IRC: irc.freenode.net #opie #opie.de

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[Martin Diehl]

On Sat, 21 Jun 2003, Holger Freyther wrote:

> The KDE e.V. and Trolltech A.S. have a legal agreement. Basicly the last 
> version of Qt  will be relicensed to a BSD like license.

So KDE e.V. could redistribute Qt sources under BSD (like) license?
Wanna have!

Martin

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[Thorsten Körner]

Am Donnerstag, 19. Juni 2003 13:04 schrieb Richard B. Johnson:
> On Wed, 18 Jun 2003, Werner Almesberger wrote:
> > Luigi Rosa wrote:
> > > <http://www.forbes.com/2003/06/18/cz_dl_0618linux.html>
> >
> > "[...] in two other Canopy companies, Troll Tech and Lineo, [...]"
> >
> > Makes one wonder what else to expect in the future ...
> >
> > - Werner
> >
> > "[...] in two other Canopy companies, Troll Tech and Lineo, [...]"
>
>                                          ^^^^^^^^^^
>                  I thought this was a joke! There __is__ really
> such a company???!! Wonder what they do....., maybe troll this
> list... hehe....
Ever heard about QT-Libs?

CU
thorsten

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[Bruce Ferrell]

Anbody know if the Canopy Group is still involved in SCO/Caldera?  Given 
  that their web site lists the Caldera -> SCO name change, I would 
suspect that they are. They did the original VC funding for Caldera and 
Lineo so I have a hunch that Lineo will be left alone.

Ray Norda may be crazy, but he's crazy like a fox!

Always, always, always... Follow the money


Richard B. Johnson wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jun 2003, Werner Almesberger wrote:
> 
> 
>>Luigi Rosa wrote:
>>
>>><http://www.forbes.com/2003/06/18/cz_dl_0618linux.html>
>>
>>"[...] in two other Canopy companies, Troll Tech and Lineo, [...]"
>>
>>Makes one wonder what else to expect in the future ...
>>
>>- Werner
> 
> 
>>"[...] in two other Canopy companies, Troll Tech and Lineo, [...]"
> 
>                                          ^^^^^^^^^^
>                  I thought this was a joke! There __is__ really
> such a company???!! Wonder what they do....., maybe troll this
> list... hehe....
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> Dick Johnson
> Penguin : Linux version 2.4.20 on an i686 machine (797.90 BogoMips).
> Why is the government concerned about the lunatic fringe? Think about it.
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> 

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[Martin List-Petersen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 741 bytes --]

On Wed, 2003-06-18 at 20:13, Scott Robert Ladd wrote:
> Martin List-Petersen wrote:
> > Ok .. here we got us a few more articles about the stuff going on.
> [snip]
> 
> I'll panic when Linus panics... or when IBM surrenders. ;}
> 
> Certainly, SCO will influence the ebb and flow of the universe; in the 
> end, I suspect it will be much ado about nothing.

I see no reason to panic yet, either.

In Europe this is taken very relaxed, also if you see the court rulings
that have been done (in Germany etc.). Sco get's no foot on the ground
before they show us some legitimate proof.

Regards,
Martin List-Petersen
martin at list-petersen dot dk
--
In Devon, Connecticut, it is unlawful to walk backwards after sunset.


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[Dominik Kubla]

Am Mittwoch, 18. Juni 2003 20:17 schrieb Martin List-Petersen:
>
> I see no reason to panic yet, either.
>
> In Europe this is taken very relaxed, also if you see the court rulings
> that have been done (in Germany etc.). Sco get's no foot on the ground
> before they show us some legitimate proof.
>

Exactly.

There might also be some unexpected benefit for us in Europe lurking there 
since it sheds a very unfavourable light on US IP and SW patent law which the 
EU is currently being trying to adopt. So all of you living in the EU, please  
point your MEP (and your state and national MP for that matter) towards this 
mess and explain to him/her why software patents and all the other crap the 
EU commission wants to inflict on us is not in the interest of EU consumers 
and companies alike and let's see what happens...

Regards,
  Dominik
-- 
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit
atrocities.    (Francois Marie Arouet aka Voltaire, 1694-1778)

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[Scott Robert Ladd]

Martin List-Petersen wrote:
> Ok .. here we got us a few more articles about the stuff going on.
[snip]

I'll panic when Linus panics... or when IBM surrenders. ;}

Certainly, SCO will influence the ebb and flow of the universe; in the
end, I suspect it will be much ado about nothing.

-- 
Scott Robert Ladd
Coyote Gulch Productions (http://www.coyotegulch.com)

Re: Sco vs. IBM

[Grzegorz Jaskiewicz]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wednesday 18 of June 2003 18:36, Martin List-Petersen wrote:
> Ok .. here we got us a few more articles about the stuff going on. A
> friend pointed me at these:
>
> Byte.com states: SCO Owns Your Computer
> http://www.byte.com/documents/s=8276/byt1055784622054/0616_marshall.html
> Comment: read and cry (or not ?) :-/
>
> On Linux Planet, they try say "SCO Pulls Trigger, Targets Torvald":
> http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/newss/4858/1/
>
> However .. more or less it is about the current way people think about
> it.
How about this one:
(english translation)
http://forum.golem.de/phorum/read.php?f=44&i=1869&t=1716

- --
Grzegorz Jaskiewicz
K4 Labs
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+8N0aqu082fCQYIgRAs06AJ4+QtFRAoRRtx90wYry3PC90lbrnQCeNwjJ
ITZNybK4seNpUEeqLyvEZVU=
=HlaP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----