From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: grog@lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey) Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 12:26:50 +0930 Subject: [TUHS] sco v. ibm In-Reply-To: <3ECE37A3.6CDF0FA9@mail.ptd.net> References: <200305221154.h4MBsZJ8019026@minnie.tuhs.org> <20030523023722.GE80220@wantadilla.lemis.com> <3ECE37A3.6CDF0FA9@mail.ptd.net> Message-ID: <20030526025650.GK15770@wantadilla.lemis.com> On Friday, 23 May 2003 at 11:00:51 -0400, T.M. Sommers wrote: > Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: >> >> On Thursday, 22 May 2003 at 7:54:03 -0400, Norman Wilson wrote: >>> I haven't come up to speed yet on SCOIBM Wars (pronounce it as you >>> like, but perhaps not in polite company), but even so I know enough >>> to ask a question: is anyone in possession of a signed, original, >>> genuine, non-electronic copy of the Bill Broderick letter of 23 Jan 2002 >>> that granted a mostly free license (as long as credit given and Caldera's >>> name not used in vain) for 32V, V7, and predecessors? >> >> This is a question I've been asking for some time. Sadly, nobody has >> answered "yes". See also the message I sent yesterday: SCO have also >> maid claims which suggest they don't recognize the statement. > > If he was their agent, then it doesn't matter what they claim to > recognize now; they are bound by his statement. Yes, of course. The issue here is whether we can prove that the statement was made. Greg -- Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 187 bytes Desc: not available URL: