What do you think about that?
Personally I think that this would only *attempt* to tarnish Linux's image
in the corporate world, and divert the real benefits to M$.
For those who cannot acccess internet:
SAN JOSE, Calif. (AP) - The SCO Group, which owns key components of the Unix
operating system, has sent letters to Linux customers claiming the software
is an "unauthorized derivative" of its property.
The letters, which were sent earlier this week to companies around the
world, warned that commercial users of Linux may face legal liability for
using the operating system without a license from SCO.
The move follows the filing of a $1 billion lawsuit in March against
International Business Machines Corp. for allegedly taking bits of Unix code
and transferring them to Linux. IBM dismissed the lawsuit as unfounded.
If the latest tactic is successful, it could undermine a tenet of the Linux
movement, which has been growing in large part because of the software's
very low cost and freedom from the hassles of proprietary software, such as
Microsoft Corp. (MSFT)'s Windows.
But even if SCO fails to convince Linux users to pay for licenses, it has
raised fear, uncertainty and doubt - or "FUD" - about Linux and whether end
users can be held liable if other portions are found to be what amounts to
"When SCO's own UNIX software code is being illegally copied into Linux, we
believe we have an obligation to educate commercial users of the potential
liability that could rest with them for using such software to run their
business," Chris Sontag, a SCO senior vice president, said Wednesday.
Lindon, Utah-based SCO acquired control of Unix intellectual property from
Novell, which had bought the rights in 1992 from AT&T. AT&T's Bell
Laboratories created Unix for minicomputers in the late 1960s and
commercialized it in the 1980s.
Linux, a Unix derivative first developed in the early 1990s by Finnish
college student Linus Torvalds, has in recent years gained in popularity
because of its low cost, reliability and ability to run on inexpensive
In an e-mail interview Wednesday, Torvalds said he has not heard what
components of Linux might be infringing.
"I'd dearly love to hear exactly - what - they think is infringing, but they
haven't told anybody," he said. "Oh, well. They seem to be more interested
in FUD than anything else."
SCO also announced it was pulling its own version of Linux, which may be
significant because it was distributed under the same license as other
versions. That license allows for the free redistribution of the software.
"I suspect the current letter is because their lawyers finally noticed that
as long as they ship Linux, they are themselves bound by the license under
which it ships," Torvalds said.
Some observers believe SCO sued IBM in an effort to be bought - a charge SCO
denies. SCO's stock price has nearly doubled since it filed the lawsuit,
said Bruce Perens, an open-source software advocate and consultant. He said
he believes it's a tactic of SCO's investors to recoup their investment.
"They don't care who or what they hurt," he said.
Darl McBride, SCO's chief executive, said the company is not trying to find
a buyer but rather informing users of the problem. He said most Linux
distributors leave their customers liable.
"Everyone is protected except the users," he said. "We're trying to
users there are these problems. We're trying to do this in a favorable
fashion. ... The hot potato is being passed. We're trying to keep them from