Re: SCO's "proof"

[Stephan von Krawczynski <skraw@ithnet.com>]

On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 13:09:27 +1000
Stuart Longland <stuartl@longlandclan.hopto.org> wrote:

> This case is getting more rediculous with each day...lfmao
> 
> Oh dear, it seems that our /comments/ are alike.  Hrmm.  Pity the
> compiller doesn't take any notice of them, and therefore, I don't see
> the evidence that the /code/ has been stolen.  Also, as others have
> quite rightfully pointed out, it doesn't even compile -- syntax errors
> galore.
> 
> Lets hope some people in the legal profession have some C knowledge --
> or at least have the sense to go directly to the kernel source on
> kernel.org rather than relying on what SCO provides.

As the only case that SCO has filed up to now is against IBM (as far as I know)
you should be aware of the possibility that this proof presented is only a
piece of FUD to distract from the real issues. IBM has never touched this
source, so it is irrelevant to the case.

Regards,
Stephan