From: wkt@minnie.tuhs.org (Warren Toomey)
Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate
Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 10:02:19 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030529000219.GA82058@minnie.tuhs.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.05.10305281816160.9998-100000@ppp-151-110-2.texoma.net>
On Wed, May 28, 2003 at 06:24:56PM -0500, Cornelius Keck wrote:
> > Here's a question of interest not to the Linux community but to
> > the TUHS one: if, as Novell now claim, the 1995 agreement didn't
> > convey the UNIX copyrights to SCO, under what right did SCO issue
> > the Ancient UNIX Source Code agreements, whether the restrictive
> > version of early 1998 or the do-as-you-like Caldera letter of early
> > 2002? Are those agreements really valid?
>
> Good point. If memory serves me correctly, the 1998 agreement was
> not free for the asking, but rather required shelling out US$100,
> which means that SCO "sold" something they never owned, which
> constitutes fraud (anybody with some legal background reading
> this: please correct). What's the statue of limitations (sp?)
> for this?
Actually, Novell have only asserted that SCO/Caldera did not obtain
the rights to System V. Now, neither the $100 nor the BSD-style
SCO/Caldera Ancient UNIX licenses covered System V, so this might
not be fraud.
It depends on whether or not SCO/Caldera have the rights to Research
Editions 1 to 7 and System III :-)
This is all getting to be like a very bad TV soap: UNIX Sons and Daughters.
We've got grandad Research who was a pioneer in the area, son USL, and
now a lot of bastard grandchildren. And of course there's the newcomer
in town called Linux.
Warren
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-05-29 0:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-05-28 19:25 Norman Wilson
2003-05-28 23:24 ` Cornelius Keck
2003-05-29 0:02 ` Warren Toomey [this message]
2003-05-29 7:49 ` Mike Haertel
2003-05-29 12:16 ` Robert Tillyard
2003-05-29 12:33 ` M. Warner Losh
2003-05-29 23:50 ` Greg 'groggy' Lehey
2003-05-29 23:56 ` M. Warner Losh
2003-05-30 0:37 ` Greg 'groggy' Lehey
2003-05-30 1:01 ` Warren Toomey
2003-05-30 1:20 ` Greg 'groggy' Lehey
2003-05-29 13:18 ` Kenneth Stailey
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-06-09 14:00 Norman Wilson
2003-06-09 10:20 zmkm zmkm
2003-06-09 15:33 ` Boyd Lynn Gerber
2003-06-08 13:09 Aharon Robbins
2003-06-08 10:32 zmkm zmkm
2003-06-08 9:56 Aharon Robbins
2003-06-09 2:32 ` Kenneth Stailey
2003-05-30 9:01 Wesley Parish
2003-05-30 1:00 Norman Wilson
2003-05-28 12:11 [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: Eric Raymond striking a blow for ... something Kenneth Stailey
2003-05-28 18:49 ` [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate Kenneth Stailey
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20030529000219.GA82058@minnie.tuhs.org \
--to=wkt@minnie.tuhs.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).