[Nottingham] Sun's financial support for SCO (12% of SCO's revenue)

[Robert Davies]

On Tuesday 23 Sep 2003 11:46, Robert Postill wrote:

> I'd certainly like a definitive, truthful answer to this. I can't stand
> the dishonesty around the whole thing. SCOs stance is reprehensible and
> the sooner we can get back to using Linux unmolested the better.

I doubt we'll get definitive truthful answers, Sun want us to believe they 
needed drivers from SCO.  That they can indemnify customers of Sun Linux Java 
Desktop is just totally unrelated, and also that SCO have apperently said Sun 
customer's won't be sued, also just pure coincidence.  They seem to want to 
have their cake and eat it, benefit from the FUD effects, support SCO's 
action against competitors, strengthen Solaris's sea-wall against the 
inrushing Linux tide, yet maintain plausible deniability, and launch 'safe' 
Linux products.  They must realise open backing for SCO, will be very 
unpopular with Unix professionals, who see the larger picture, and want 
vendors using the opportunities to compete more effectively with M$, rather 
than fight harder with each other in a declining market.  Sun might benefit 
in short term, longer term it's a loose-loose strategy for the Unix/Linux 
market.

SCO, M$ and Sun, benefit from a climate of uncertainty, that's the reason much 
talk, little facts or evidence shown, plenty of threats and warnings of 
risks, plus planting the idea of disrespect of IP, which cleverly confuses 
opposition to patents with respect for copyrights.

There's quite a few comments floating about, about SCO including GPL code, 
according to ex-SCO employees, and fingers have been pointing to their Linux 
personality module, but I've not seen anything authoriative, though the 
Groklaw letter does mention it  
http://www.groklaw.com/article.php?story=20030920122117265

 "Would you be willing to allow us to check for such violations? We 
particularly wish to check your Linux Kernel Personality (LKP) source code. 
We suspect that there may be GPL source code taken from the Linux kernel and 
used in LKP without authorization, and we challenge you to prove this has not 
happened by showing us your LKP source code, throughout its complete 
development history to date."

Rob