Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> Note from News Picks:
>
<snip>
Of course PJ thinks SCO still matters. Without SCO, PJ doesn't really matter
any more, so it behooves her to keep beating that drum as long as anyone
will march to it.
Personally, I haven't thought SCO mattered for some time. Certain
individuals within SCO matter. Such as D. McB., for he can answer the
allegations that SCO was put up to this attack by MS. This is something I
personally have grave doubts about, unlike the more paranoid conspiracy
minded *cough*pj*cough* among the linux community. Though it doesn't
surprise me a bit that MS would chime in with some circumspect financial
help after the fact.
Even Linus said as far back as 2003 that the suit didn't really matter.
Q: [Impact of the lawsuit?]
None, really. The people I work with couldn't care less.-- Linus Torvalds,
2003-03-10
or
As far as I can tell, SCO doesn't have any IP claims. Their lawsuit isn't
about IP claims; it's about some contract dispute with IBM. The only IP
issues they have brought up in a verifiable way has been the RCU [Read Copy
Update, a way to access data structures that may be changing on multiple
CPUs with less locking than normal] work that IBM did, and that SCO doesn't
have any IP rights to that I can see: the patents are all IBM, and the code
was written by (and thus copyrighted by) IBM too. Well, it was Sequent at
the time, but they're all IBM now.-- Linus Torvalds, 2003-06-23
So while the rest of the world went on implementing, some seem really stuck
on this SCO thing that only a few give any cycles to.
--
"This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is
not God who kills the children. Not Fate that butchers them or Destiny
that feeds them to dogs. It's us. Only us." - Rorschach, Watchmen
|
|
