Skip to comments.
IP Cops to target Linux end-users?
SCO.com ^
| May 12, 2003
| Darl McBride
Posted on 05/14/2003 2:29:38 PM PDT by Bobalu
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-50 next last
To: jdege
There's no Unix code in Linux, and SCO knows it. Since Linux is Open Source, SCO could very easily put its money where its mouth is.
The fact that they aren't doing so speaks volumes.
21
posted on
05/14/2003 5:42:15 PM PDT
by
E. Pluribus Unum
(Drug prohibition laws help support terrorism.)
To: DigiLinus
22
posted on
05/14/2003 5:46:52 PM PDT
by
E. Pluribus Unum
(Drug prohibition laws help support terrorism.)
To: John Robinson; B Knotts; stainlessbanner; TechJunkYard; ShadowAce; Knitebane; AppyPappy; jae471; ...
The Penguin Ping.
Wanna be Penguified? Just holla!
![](http://www.cnn.com/2001/TECH/industry/12/27/linux.2002.idg/story.linux.generic.jpg)
Got root?
23
posted on
05/14/2003 5:49:38 PM PDT
by
rdb3
(Nerve-racking since 0413hrs on XII-XXII-MCMLXXI)
To: DanzigGirl
Why didn't they say anything before? I refuse to give up my Linux OS. You go, gurl! ;-)
![](http://www.freeavatars.net/vpimages/backgrounds/fhbg333.gif)
Doing bad things to bad people...
24
posted on
05/14/2003 5:52:24 PM PDT
by
rdb3
(Nerve-racking since 0413hrs on XII-XXII-MCMLXXI)
To: DigiLinus
XP cost $100 to $200 per machine. Does anyone know how much unix cost per machine? Clarify your question. Do you mean UNIX as in SystemV UNIX? Or Linux as in Redhat, Mandrake, etc.?
![](http://www.freeavatars.net/vpimages/backgrounds/fhbg333.gif)
Doing bad things to bad people...
25
posted on
05/14/2003 5:54:20 PM PDT
by
rdb3
(Nerve-racking since 0413hrs on XII-XXII-MCMLXXI)
To: AFreeBird
This revenue stream is not to exceed $84 million net present value, and will end by the year 2002. This may explain the timing of the lawsuit. No point in trying to make money when a big chunk would go to Novell, but now that SCO can keep all of the money, they are getting aggressive.
26
posted on
05/14/2003 5:55:39 PM PDT
by
PAR35
To: Bobalu
This should come with a laugh track.
27
posted on
05/14/2003 5:58:49 PM PDT
by
snooker
To: A Fighting Liberal
Sun owns rights to the code and APIs that are under dispute. Sun bought licenses in the 90s that were good forever. They also got the right to use the UNIX trademark. So how does this work again?
28
posted on
05/14/2003 6:01:25 PM PDT
by
snooker
To: snooker
Sun Solaris not Affected by IBM-SCO UNIX Licensing Dispute
3/10/2003 - Sun Microsystems, Inc. confirmed with its customers and partners that it has licensing rights to UNIX code, on which the Solaris[tm] Operating System is based for both SPARC and recently available x86 systems. In light of SCO's legal dispute with IBM over UNIX licensing rights, Sun announced it has absolutely no licensing issues with SCO today. Sun's previous licensing agreements give Sun complete UNIX IP rights in relation to Sun's operating systems. This makes the Solaris Operating System a safe choice for customers moving forward. With the Solaris multiplatform product line, customers can have a consistent Solaris environment from low-end x86 servers, up to hundreds of processors, in a SPARC mainframe-class system.
Sun confirms that:
* As part of a series of licensing agreements, Sun acquired rights to make and ship derivative products based on the intellectual property in UNIX. This forms the foundation for the Solaris OS that ships today.
* Sun's complete line of Solaris and Linux products -- including Solaris for the SPARC and x86 platforms, Trusted Solaris[tm], the industry's premier highly secure operating system, and Sun Linux -- are covered by Sun's portfolio of UNIX licensing agreements.
* Solaris and Sun Linux represent safe choices for those companies that develop and deploy services based on UNIX systems.
29
posted on
05/14/2003 6:06:19 PM PDT
by
snooker
To: A Fighting Liberal
Sun is a hardware company, and a damned good one at that. You can even run Linux on Sparc machines. This is why Sun will be around for a long time.
30
posted on
05/14/2003 6:08:08 PM PDT
by
klute
To: snooker
31
posted on
05/14/2003 6:10:26 PM PDT
by
snooker
To: Bobalu
It seems a lot of companies are going around saying their stuff is free and then when it becomes popular saying, you have to pay us for it. This has happened with mp3 files, some gif files and now Linux. This is fraud, and the courts should not allow it.
32
posted on
05/14/2003 6:15:47 PM PDT
by
gore3000
To: DigiLinus
Windows XP is great. Who needs unix/linux? I have used many versions of linux. Its really getting better with each version released. My main concern is cost per machine. XP cost $100 to $200 per machine. Does anyone know how much unix cost per machine?
Let's put it this way, if one could barter with intelligence as if it were money, you wouldn't be able to afford it.
33
posted on
05/14/2003 6:16:20 PM PDT
by
SpaceBar
To: Bobalu
The GNU Public License (GPL) is a "viral" license. If a firm has its code included in the kernel and then distributes it, it is now "open source".
So now SCO has chosen to "suspend" Linux distribution after the fact?
Yea, right.
The only way to explicitly avoid GPL and be protected by "Copyleft" is to have one's application access services through a designated library (glib.c). Richard Stallman (and lot'sa IP attorneys) are very clear on this point.
</geek speak>
To: A Fighting Liberal
Before Linux bothers Microsoft, it'll kill Sun.
They won't have to. Linux is already hurting Sun's propriatary OS business, just like it is hurting SCO. That's why Sun has partially got on the Linux bandwagon. Probably the biggest threat to MS is IBM pushing Linux on an equal footing with Windows.
To: walkingman
Bloated and behemothic back in the very early 90's when I dealt with them. Still is. In '98 I thought their 'Enterprise' OS was a BSD link-farm with a thin coat of System-V wax.
To: jdege
There's no Unix code in Linux, and SCO knows it.
Correct, there is no Unix code in the Linux kernel. The Linux kernel is a Unix clone without any propriatary code. Though the code in question may be something in the "Linux Environment" (i.e., outside the kernel) in one of the distributions that is being sold. Hard to say since SCO hasn't laid out any specifics about this yet.
To: Bobalu
Totally Bogus News. This did NOT happen. Yet. IBM and Red Hat Inc. today announced a partnership under which IBM will license Red Hat to develop and maintain IBM Linux, which Red Hat will also be free to distribute as Red Hat linux. The move follows a recent lawsuit filed by SCO Group, which alleged that linux contains unlicensed code from AT&T Unix, which it has purchased.
IBM has a fully paid, royalty-free, worldwide, perpetual license to Unix which it acquired from AT&T prior to the purchase of Unix by Novell, Inc.. "Whatever components of AT&T Unix might be in IBM linux, they are covered by our blanket Unix license. We look forward to working with Red Hat to distribute IBM linux worldwide," said an IBM spokesperson. Red Hat übergeek John Whatisname said, "I guess this means those lawyers who bought SCO for the IP play are hosed. Too bad." |
38
posted on
05/14/2003 7:07:42 PM PDT
by
Nick Danger
(The liberals are slaughtering themselves at the gates of the newsroom)
Comment #39 Removed by Moderator
To: frosty snowman
Probably the biggest threat to MS is IBM pushing Linux on an equal footing with Windows.It's worse than that. IBM is pushing Linux on all of its hardware that Windows won't run on at all. The PCs are still being shipped with XP, for now.
But consider that every Unix server replaced with Linux is still a loss to Microsoft, because they'd sell at least 3 or 4 server licenses for Intel servers to replace one Unix box. MS is kaput in the server room and they know it.
And now Linux is intruding on the desktop.
Microsoft's worst enemy is its own licensing practices. Particularly where small business is concerned, the costs are spiraling out of control, and these guys are waking up to the fact that if they don't get out NOW it's going to be much more expensive in the future. MS is more likely to cut the big corporations a deal to keep them locked in, but they're going after the small guys with license audits and three-year upgrade cycles.
MS has no choice, really. Their market is saturated and nobody wants to keep buying the same old stuff over and over. MS is moving toward a subscription-based revenue generator, and that's why they're pushing DRM and.NET and Palladium. Once they can control the customer's access to his own data, he must keep paying up or he's out of business.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-50 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson