The Penguin Ping.
Wanna be Penguified? Just holla!
Got root?
Posted on 08/13/2003 10:51:45 AM PDT by Salo
The SCO(R) Group Announces Final Termination of IBM / Sequent's Contract to Use or License Dynix Software LINDON, Utah, Aug 13, 2003 /PRNewswire-FirstCall via COMTEX/ --
The SCO(R) Group (SCO)(Nasdaq: SCOX) delivered final written notice yesterday to Sequent Computer Systems for termination of its UNIX System V software contract. Sequent is now owned by IBM. The Sequent (IBM) contract was terminated for improper transfer of Sequent's UNIX source code and development methods into Linux. As a result, IBM no longer has the right to use or license the Sequent UNIX product known as "Dynix/ptx." Customers may not acquire a license in Dynix/ptx from today's date forward.
(Logo: http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/prnh/19990421/SCOLOGO )
SCO's System V UNIX contract allowed Sequent to prepare derivative works and modifications of System V software "provided the resulting materials were treated as part of the Original [System V] Software." Restrictions on use of the Original System V Software include the requirement of confidentiality, a prohibition against transfer of ownership, and a restriction against use for the benefit of third parties. Sequent-IBM has nevertheless contributed approximately 148 files of direct Sequent UNIX code to the Linux 2.4 and 2.5 kernels, containing 168,276 lines of code. This Sequent code is critical NUMA and RCU multi-processor code previously lacking in Linux. Sequent-IBM has also contributed significant UNIX-based development methods to Linux in addition to the direct lines of code specified above. Through these Linux contributions, Sequent-IBM failed to treat Dynix as part of the original System V software, and exceeded the scope of permitted use under its UNIX System V contract with SCO.
SCO gave Sequent-IBM two months written notice prior to termination, as required by contract. IBM failed to cure its breach of the Sequent-IBM contract, or to offer any solution whatsoever to cure its breach. SCO's termination of the Sequent-IBM UNIX System V license is self-effectuating and does not require court approval. SCO previously terminated IBM's right to use or license IBM's UNIX product known as AIX. From and after June 16, 2003, customers no longer have the legal right to acquire new AIX licenses.
About SCO
The SCO Group (Nasdaq: SCOX) helps millions of customers in more than 82 countries to grow their businesses everyday. Headquartered in Lindon, Utah, SCO has a worldwide network of more than 11,000 resellers and 4,000 developers. SCO Global Services provides reliable localized support and services to partners and customers. For more information on SCO products and services, visit http://www.sco.com .
SCO, and the associated SCO logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of The SCO Group, Inc. in the U.S. and other countries. UNIX is a registered trademark of The Open Group. All other brand or product names are or may be trademarks of, and are used to identify products or services of, their respective owners.
SOURCE The SCO Group
Surprised you posted this. Seems potentially very damaging to your side of the argument, especially since the Sequent contracts aren't in any way being leaked by IBM to refute this.
July 22, 2003 - Quoting Blake Sowell of SCO:
MozillaQuest Magazine:
Does SCO have registered copyrights for:
(a) scalability improvements,
(b) performance measurement and improvements,
(c) serviceability and error logging improvements,
(d) NUMA scheduler and other scheduler improvements,
(e) Linux PPC 32- and 64-bit support,
(f) AIX Journaling File System
(g) enterprise volume management system to other Linux components,
(h) clusters and cluster installation, including distributed lock manager and other lock management technologies,
(i) threading,
(j) general systems management functions, and
(k) other areas.
Blake Stowell: "SCO does not have copyrights on these, but as stated earlier, this is not about copyrights. It is about a contract. SCO had a contract with IBM that said that once licensed, they had to hold this software in confidence. AIX is based on UNIX System V source code. Any derivative work has to be held in confidence. They have not held the AIX code in confidence, which is why we have a lawsuit against them."
Their contract with IBM is their business. But the copyright, in their own words, DOES NOT BELONG TO THEM!
Their impending insolvency was never a question - it was whether the inevitable could be used as leverage by Billy Gates.
Think of SCO as a 'kamikaze for hire'
Point two: It is an extrememly bad business practice to release announcements to the press based on as yet unsubstantiated claims. SCO has claimed that IBM no longer has any rights to UNIX, and that various business in industry as well as the U.S. government may owe them large amounts of money. Please understand that I am not an attorney, but I believe that they may run afoul of the law for making such unproved statements. Most companies are generally tight-lipped about the terms of any pending lawsuits as well as any potential windfall resulting from a successful conclusion. I sincerely believe that SCO is risking the involvement of the Federal Trade Commission for making some of these claims before any trial or settlement is completed, even if some judgement is delivered against IBM!
Wanna be Penguified? Just holla!
Got root?
I'm not surprised you're surprised. Since people like you live by innuendo, FUD and lies, the idea of actually posting straight facts must be anathema to you.
Dump your SCO stock yet or did Bill tell you to hold on a little longer?
Dynix was the operating system for the Sequent machines, the lastest of which were called "NUMA-Q" machines. IBM chose not to continue development of that series when they bought the company. SCO will next announce that they have cancelled IBM's right to sell punch card equipment. Disclaimer: I know Casey Powell and Scott Gibson, the Sequent founders. If I said why I know them, I would have to kill myself. |
Does it require Novell's approval? ;-)
http://radio.weblogs.com/0120124/2003/08/08.html
Enjoy.
dandelion wrote:That clears up one of my questions about this whole SCO/Linux mess.
Their contract with IBM is their business. But the copyright, in their own words, DOES NOT BELONG TO THEM!
Now, for the obvious next question. If SCO doesn't own the copyrights to these items, why in the hell would I want to pay SCO to buy a license to these things?
It seems like Mr. Stowell just told us all that this "licenses" are a complete fraud.
Surprised you posted this. Seems potentially very damaging to your side of the argument, especially since the Sequent contracts aren't in any way being leaked by IBM to refute this.
Hi Dandelion. That may be true for the IBM case, however it might not help Linux users if/when they are approached by SCO for OTHER contributions to Linux that possibly came from other ATT code samples that SCO does have copyright on. IBM is only one of many infractors (according to SCO), which is estimated by analysts to include Silicon Graphics and NEC among others.
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.
Another "pump" press release for whatever fools want to buy into their stock while SCO insiders quietly dump theirs. Here they "cancel" new sales of something that isn't even sold anymore. I guess they figure that some "greater fools" out there won't know that, and the press will imagine that SCO has landed another mighty blow.