[TUHS] sco v. ibm

[TUHS] sco v. ibm

[Ian King]

Reminds me of the old joke about the gnat buzzing around the elephant's nether end, with rape on its mind....  :-)  

________________________________

From: tuhs-admin@minnie.tuhs.org on behalf of Phil Garcia
Sent: Wed 5/21/2003 12:53 PM
To: tuhs at tuhs.org
Subject: [TUHS] sco v. ibm



Hi,

What do you make of the SCO (Caldera) lawsuit?
Does it affect the archive in any way?
_______________________________________________
TUHS mailing list
TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs

[TUHS] sco v. ibm

[Kenneth Stailey]

--- Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog at lemis.com> wrote:
> 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

The fact that they are not threatened by TUHS the way they are by Linux will
probably make them ignore TUHS but you never know.



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com

[TUHS] sco v. ibm

[Christopher Vance]

On Mon, May 26, 2003 at 12:26:50PM +0930, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
: Yes, of course.  The issue here is whether we can prove that the
: statement was made.

I guess the issue is what Dion L Johnson II, Paul Hatch, John
Terpstra, Bill Broderick, "drew at caldera.com", and/or Ransom Love will
say in a relevant court about the existence and veracity of the
announcing email.

It's interesting that the Levenez chart, used by SCO to argue that
Linux "stole stuff", comes from a page linking to a copy of the BSDish
Caldera license.

-- 
Christopher Vance

[TUHS] sco v. ibm

[Greg 'groggy' Lehey]

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: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20030526/df678dca/attachment.sig>

[TUHS] sco v. ibm

[Norman Wilson]

T. M. Sommers:

  If [Broderick] was [SCO's or Caldera's] agent, then it doesn't matter what
  they claim to recognize now; they are bound by his statement.

Assuming it can be proven that the statement was officially made,
which is why I ask after properly signed hardcopy rather than the
PDF file we have all seen.

Probably there are documents hidden away in SCO's files--there must
have been some paper trail leading to Broderick's letter--but that
is likely to be harder to track down from outside.

I don't doubt Broderick really wrote that letter, nor that he was
authorized to make the statement.  But the problem before us isn't
truth, it's proof.

Norman Wilson
Toronto ON

[TUHS] sco v. ibm

[T.M. Sommers]

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.

[TUHS] sco v. ibm

[Greg 'groggy' Lehey]

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.

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: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20030523/80ae69c8/attachment.sig>

[TUHS] sco v. ibm

[Norman Wilson]

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?

Certainly there are electronic copies around; it existed (perhaps still
exists) as a PDF file on Caldera's web site.  I have a hardcopy in my
own files, next to the old SCO Ancient UNIX Source Code agreement for
which I paid hard cash (as we used to call the US dollar).  But if there
is an original somewhere, that might carry more weight.

Is Bill Broderick still in an appropriately high position at Caldera
or SCO?

Norman Wilson
Toronto ON

[TUHS] sco v. ibm

[Greg 'groggy' Lehey]

On Thursday, 22 May 2003 at  9:19:45 +1000, Warren Toomey wrote:
> On Wed, May 21, 2003 at 02:53:17PM -0500, Phil Garcia wrote:
>> Hi,
>> What do you make of the SCO (Caldera) lawsuit?
>> Does it affect the archive in any way?
>
> Assuming that the Caldera BSD-style license agreement for Ancient UNIX
> is real (http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Caldera-license.pdf), then it gives
> us the right to freely distribute these systems.

I'd feel a *lot* happier if we'd finally get confirmation from SCO
that they both know about this license and agree that it's genuine.  I
was contacted by a reporter a week or so ago, and I told her about it.
She contacted Caldera, who pointed to
http://shop.caldera.com/caldera/ancient.html as the current valid
license agreement:

> When I mentionned to SCO that they had released free licenses to
> ancient Unix, they said that that license was for non-commercial
> use. When I mentionned the letter (January 2002) from Bill Broderick
> that seemingly grants unemcumbered use of these ancient Unix
> versions, SCO said that that is not the license agreement and that
> they would send me the license agreement. Here it is:
> http://shop.caldera.com/caldera/ancient.html

It appears that there has been such turnover in Caldera/SCO in the
last 15 months that they don't know what they have done.

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: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20030522/08c371f2/attachment.sig>

[TUHS] sco v. ibm

[Warren Toomey]

On Wed, May 21, 2003 at 02:53:17PM -0500, Phil Garcia wrote:
> Hi,
> What do you make of the SCO (Caldera) lawsuit?
> Does it affect the archive in any way?

Assuming that the Caldera BSD-style license agreement for Ancient UNIX
is real (http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Caldera-license.pdf), then it gives
us the right to freely distribute these systems.

	Warren

[TUHS] sco v. ibm

[Gregg C Levine]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 954 bytes --]

Hello again from Gregg C Levine
Personally? I think SCO should just drop it. For everyone else? Search
me. Let's wait a few more weeks.
-------------------
Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net
------------------------------------------------------------
"The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi
"Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi )
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda )



> -----Original Message-----
> From: tuhs-admin at minnie.tuhs.org [mailto:tuhs-admin at minnie.tuhs.org]
On
> Behalf Of Phil Garcia
> Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2003 3:53 PM
> To: tuhs at tuhs.org
> Subject: [TUHS] sco v. ibm
> 
> Hi,
> 
> What do you make of the SCO (Caldera) lawsuit?
> Does it affect the archive in any way?
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs

[TUHS] sco v. ibm

[Phil Garcia]

Hi,

What do you make of the SCO (Caldera) lawsuit?
Does it affect the archive in any way?