Microsoft Tight-Lipped On Unix Ownership Question
,----[ Quote ]
| For months, I've been trying to get Microsoft to answer a few questions about
| the Unix technologies in its intellectual property portfolio. Microsoft
| agreed to an interview, then backed out. So the question remains: How much
| Unix code does Microsoft have its hands on?
`----
http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2007/12/microsoft_tight.html
Related:
NT influenced by Unix
,----[ Quote ]
| (Gates:) "And through Windows NT, you can see it throughout the design.
| In a weak sense, it is a form of Unix. There are so many of the
| design decisions that have been influenced by that environment. And
| that's no accident."
|
| In light of the recent saber rattling about Linux and patents, the "There
| are so many of the design decisions that have been influenced by that
| environment" sentence is particularly interesting if these patent
| threats include things that are prior Unix art. "In a weak sense, it
| is a form of Unix" is also telling. I said before that I don't think
| that's the case; I think the patent stuff is talking about things like
| Samba and Mono, but even there the "influenced by that environment"
| could be important in the court of public opinion if not in actual
| law.
`----
http://aplawrence.com/Unixart/gates_quote.html
Enterprise Unix Roundup: Ghosts of Xenix Past
,----[ Quote ]
| Various theories are circulating as to why Microsoft has been so gung-ho
| about intellectual property enforcement lately. I have opined about it
| myself in other venues, basically putting forth the theory that the
| staff at Redmond is running a bit scared right now as they watch Linux
| slowly encompass the server market.
|
| [...]
|
| The document, submitted in The SCO Group vs. Novell trial, was a letter
| "that an outside attorney for Santa Cruz sent to the Department of
| Justice in 1996, complaining about a 1987 agreement between AT&T and
| Microsoft which [SCO] says it had inherited, with terms such that [SCO]
| found itself contractually compelled to include outdated Microsoft
| Xenix code forevermore in all its own Unix products and to pay
| royalties on the undesired and irrelevant code."
|
| [...]
|
| It is not clear if the current incarnation of SCO, The SCO Group, is
| still entitled to pay Xenix royalties. But Microsoft still does a
| lot of business with The SCO Group, and if it could ever find a
| direct line between Xenix and Linux, it would make for a very
| powerful weapon to kill off Linux once and for all.
`----
http://www.serverwatch.com/eur/article.php/3687156
Deposition of Darl McBride in Novell: Dreaming of Billions From Linux
,----[ Quote ]
| But the SCO dream as I see it is simply this: they'd like those
| volunteer Linux programmers, who didn't charge one thin dime for
| their wonderful code, to, in effect, support SCO for life, based
| on alleged, but not specified, "infringement" that no one is
| allowed to fix. Does it get lower than that?
`----
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070602185104478
The Goldfarb Declaration - Updated: MS Statement
,----[ Quote ]
| According to the Declaration, Richard Emerson was not the only
| Microsoft employee Goldfarb was dealing with in connection with the
| BayStar investment in SCO. He mentions by name two others, from two
| other departments.
`----
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20061009152706664
|
|