The Unix Heritage Society mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marc Rochkind <mrochkind@gmail.com>
To: "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" <grog@lemis.com>
Cc: tuhs@tuhs.org
Subject: [TUHS] Re: SCO's "evidence" (was: RIP Darl McBride former CEO of SCO)
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2024 17:05:45 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOkr1zXz3=Qee0gfA8EGu5i6EF7ztAKmQACXTOBtEFWAE-dpcA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZylPu5zhpKXDhA-t@hydra.lemis.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4898 bytes --]

By evidence, I mean evidence that was part of the legal case(s). Material
presented as a part of a marketing, sales, or public relations effort is
not evidence in this sense. I don't know what Darl McBride and SCO were
doing here, as I didn't work on that and only met Darl for 30 sec. (He came
over to say hello to me in a conference room, and then the lawyers came
over and told him to get away from me, for fear that he would pollute the
waters. I worked extensively with his brother, Kevin.) My understanding is
that SCO was trying to get money from Linux licenses of some sort. The
Linux community freaked out.

There were two principal legal cases. The first alleged copyright
infringement in the development of Linux. I'm not sure who exactly was
being sued, since I didn't work on this case. People tended to think that
"Linux" was being sued, but I don't think there was any such entity like
that. The second case, which I worked on, was about breach of contract
between IBM and AT&T, and SCO I guess took on the rights and obligations of
AT&T. This second case was extraordinarily complicated and, inasmuch as
most everything about it was sealed, Groklaw and people in general never
did understand what the issues were. Which, of course, didn't serve as an
impediment for them offering up opinions about it. This second case started
about 2005 and ended about two or three years ago, so it went on for about
15 years. The copyright case I think ended when it was determined that the
copyrights in question didn't belong to SCO.

The way the copyright case ended doesn't mean that Linux development didn't
violate copyrights. I'm pretty sure that it did, based on conversations
with a friend of mine who was a technical expert on that part of the case.
One might ask, how could Torvalds and all those Linux developers violate
System V copyrights since they had never seen System V code? The answer is
that corporations such as IBM also contributed to Linux, and those
corporations did have such access.

If one wants to take all this seriously and differentiate between what one
knows to be true, on the one hand, and what one thinks is true or wants to
be true, on the other hand, then I think one would realize that nobody
outside of the legal teams knows anything about the case. As I said, I know
a whole lot about part of the case(s) and next to nothing about the other
parts. Groklaw used to reprint redacted documents that had been released by
the court, a couple of which I wrote, but ignored the fact that they were
redacted and that all the juicy parts were missing. Generally, if anything
was important, it was sealed.

I just a few minutes ago glanced at the Wikipedia article "SCO–Linux
disputes" and it's not bad. It does pretty much explain the breach of
contract case. There is a section titled "IBM code in Linux" that lists
some technologies (e.g., JFS, RCU), and that's the area that I worked on. I
wrote a program that could in effect do a "diff" on entire operating
systems, hundreds of thousands of lines of code. It was amazing to see the
results. Even the attorneys who were doing the suing were amazed. (Whether
all my discoveries represented actual breach of contract is a legal
question, not a technical one, and was therefore well outside the scope of
my work.)

Marc

On Mon, Nov 4, 2024 at 3:50 PM Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog@lemis.com> wrote:

> On Monday,  4 November 2024 at 10:35:40 -0700, Marc Rochkind wrote:
> > Many opinions of the evidence, especially on Groklaw, but also
> > elsewhere, including here. But none of these people offering
> > opinions have really seen the evidence,
>
> I think that depends on what SCO (and when) claimed as evidence.  They
> did present slides of obfuscated code (replacing ASCII with Greek
> letters in the assumption that nobody could recognize the original and
> maybe that the code was too precious to show in the orignal).  I can't
> find that any more, and maybe its on one of the many dead links on
> http://www.lemis.com/grog/SCO/.  But
> http://www.lemis.com/grog/SCO/code-comparison.php refers to it and
> identifies the errors in the claims.
>
> > Mostly people talk about "evidence " offered by Darl at the
> > start. But NONE of the actual evidence came from him. It was
> > researched by a team of expert witnesses on both sides, of which I
> > was one.
>
> I'd be very interested to hear what else they presented.  Did your
> conclusions agree with mine?
>
> Greg
> --
> Sent from my desktop computer.
> Finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key.
> See complete headers for address and phone numbers.
> This message is digitally signed.  If your Microsoft mail program
> reports problems, please read http://lemis.com/broken-MUA.php
>


-- 
*My new email address is mrochkind@gmail.com <mrochkind@gmail.com>*

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5939 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2024-11-05  0:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-11-04  1:17 [TUHS] RIP Darl McBride former CEO of SCO Will Senn
2024-11-04  2:31 ` [TUHS] " Greg 'groggy' Lehey
2024-11-04  3:34   ` Wesley Parish
2024-11-04 17:35     ` Marc Rochkind
2024-11-04 22:50       ` [TUHS] SCO's "evidence" (was: RIP Darl McBride former CEO of SCO) Greg 'groggy' Lehey
2024-11-05  0:05         ` Marc Rochkind [this message]
2024-11-05  0:39           ` [TUHS] " Warner Losh
2024-11-05  1:09             ` Larry McVoy
2024-11-05  1:32               ` ron minnich
2024-11-05  1:39                 ` Warner Losh
2024-11-05  3:14                 ` Larry McVoy
2024-11-05  5:00                   ` Warner Losh
2024-11-05  1:35               ` Warner Losh
2024-11-05  1:54                 ` Larry McVoy
2024-11-05  2:13                   ` Warner Losh
2024-11-05  3:14                     ` Marc Rochkind
2024-11-07 20:41                       ` ron minnich
2024-11-07 20:59                         ` Marc Rochkind
2024-11-08  0:03                           ` Theodore Ts'o
2024-11-08  0:35                             ` Warner Losh
2024-11-09 18:29                           ` G. Branden Robinson
2024-11-09 20:30                             ` Theodore Ts'o
2024-11-09 22:23                               ` G. Branden Robinson
2024-11-10  4:27                                 ` Theodore Ts'o
2024-11-12  1:55                       ` Kevin Bowling
2024-11-12  2:34                         ` Kevin Bowling
2024-11-12 18:12                           ` Marc Rochkind
2024-11-05  1:31           ` [TUHS] IBM's involvement (was: SCO's "evidence" (was: RIP Darl McBride former CEO of SCO)) Greg 'groggy' Lehey
2024-11-05  3:04             ` [TUHS] " Marc Rochkind
2024-11-06  4:00               ` Greg 'groggy' Lehey
2024-11-05 17:55 [TUHS] Re: SCO's "evidence" (was: RIP Darl McBride former CEO of SCO) Noel Chiappa
2024-11-05 18:52 ` ron minnich
2024-11-05 19:01   ` Warner Losh
     [not found]     ` <CAEoi9W66zUf8RvzEYQG7qNXN-BX6gyDejXCrHw3rk46UM_-XPg@mail.gmail.com>
2024-11-08 20:27       ` Warner Losh
     [not found]         ` <61F8BCE5-44C5-49D2-BEFE-B8717E3DDEA8@kdbarto.org>
     [not found]           ` <CANCZdfrJExbrJqp3MgE0Tp9-a=PYTeFpkULk8NnPfBTeoyLW-g@mail.gmail.com>
2024-11-08 23:18             ` [TUHS] Fwd: " Warner Losh
2024-11-09  0:40               ` [TUHS] " rob
2024-11-05 18:58 ` Warner Losh

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='CAOkr1zXz3=Qee0gfA8EGu5i6EF7ztAKmQACXTOBtEFWAE-dpcA@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=mrochkind@gmail.com \
    --cc=grog@lemis.com \
    --cc=tuhs@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).