[Sussex] IBM Counter-sue SCO

[Steve Dobson]

On 7/8/2003 Geoff Teale wrote:
> OK, so the gloves are starting to come off.  It is now apparent that
> SCO's case may never actually get to court (and it's possible SCO would
> prefer it that way).  Enough evidence has built up to suggest the
> following:
>
> - SCO do not have any presentable evidence of SCO code appearing in the
>   Linux kernel.

Just because SCO haven't presented good evidence doesn't mean they don't
have any.

> - SCO do not have any right to IP created as a wholly new portion of a
>   derivative work - ie., code that was created within AIX by IBM is not
>   SCO IP.

That became evident quickly and SCO dropped that part of the case.

> - SCO actually make use of several of IBM's AIX "innovations" without
>   permission or license in UnixWare.

Well we all sort of knew that there was a lot of "innovation polution"
in the *nix world - I am hoping this case will sort it all out.

> - SCO UnixWare contains Linux compatibility code that is taken directly
>   from the Linux kernel but which is not used under the terms of the
>   GPL.

In which case the FSF should take action (see below).

> It seems that SCO's real strategy was to create a tangible threat to
> Linux users and then try to scare them into paying for Licenses that
> they do not need (this is backed up by SCO's "buy it before the court
> case and it's half price" approach).  As a result of these "suggestions"
> the following is happening:

I find this difficult to believe.  The CSO of SCO either has:

  * No clue on how IP clames go (history suggests he does after all
    he has made a business out of buying companies and then suing
    others over the IP rights of his new company), or

  * He does not understand the added complexities of the *nix family
    tree and the effect on this case (my view as I think he is from
    outside the computer industry).
 
> - Red Hat are suing SCO for suggesting that they [Red Hat] were behaving
>   improperly in distributing Linux.

Isn't counter-suing the name of the game in the US?  I always though
that if you didn't counter-sue then you were guilty.

> - IBM are counter-suing SCO for the making of unfounded claims  that
>   could be damaging to their business and Copyright infringements with
>   regard to works derived from the AIX codebase.

Dito on the counter-suing.  As for the AIX infringements if he is ignorent
of the *nix family tree then this gives IBM a way of wiping SCO of the
planet.

> - The Free Software Foundation are considering action against SCO with
>   regard to the GPL and use of Linux kernel code in proprietary
>   software.

This is the one I want to see.  If SCO have got GPL code IN Unixware then
this is the very case the FSF can use to prove the GPL in court (which is
needed).  I could also fource the SysV code in to the public domain as 
the FSF could clame as SCO knowing inserted GPLed code into Unixware then
the GPL must now apply to that source.  This would also be a very good
think.  I hope that RF & IBM get behind the FSF.

Steve