Why not, if we can make money off of it. Speaking of imitation, you've just described 99% of Microsoft Windows, but at least the Linux imitators give back what they did.
That suit may or may not have merit but the principles they are arguing are correct - that America's intellectual property is very valuable and should be protected,
And it should be protected. Anyone writing for Linux should be able to show originality of code. Most closed-source software companies have procedures in place for this too, only we don't get to look and see if our stuff got copied. Want to take bets on the amount of copied code in Windows? Too bad we'll never know the answer though.
The people running the Linux kernel have asked to see the questionable code free of restrictive terms. They have offered to immediately remove any code that SCO can show copyright for. This offer of immediate redress is standard operating procedure for honest organization finding itself in violation of copyright. But SCO doesn't want to let them redress any violations by showing the code. Why?
That's simply wrong, Windows never had the exact same command syntax of another product, nor the same primary directory names, nor compatibility with other software of any other system.
Unfortunately you're starting to display the tactics of some of the fanatics I was happy to see you denounce earlier - when you begin losing the argument, switch to bashing M$ as quickly as possible.
Want to take bets on the amount of copied code in Windows? Too bad we'll never know the answer though.
Well if M$ is found guilty, they should pay, just like always. And the important thing is, commercial software companies can pay, because they have income, and can fully restitute if code theft occurs. In open source, there's no restitution of damage because some guy working in Russia could get pinned for the blame, and the customers who aren't protected by any sort of guarantee become liable.
But SCO doesn't want to let them redress any violations by showing the code. Why?
Because it's so obvious how much code it is. It's all the code that was in AIX, that now is in Linux. Which is tons. There are contracts with IBM and other companies now owned by IBM that said derrivative software rights remained with ATT/SCO, and that's what their calling them on.
Novell is stepping right into the crossfire as well. How ironic if they become liable to SCO for software infringement, for the very source code they once owned.