Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Joe Bonforte
So I don't see where SCO is exacerbating any damages. It is merely preventing those who have presumably infringed in the past from hiding that infringement before SCO sues them.

None of SCO's pleadings stipulate that future damages are barred. And "those who have presumably infringed in the past" couldn't "hide it" already by ditching Linux altogether? Tell me another good joke.

21 posted on 08/19/2003 8:44:28 AM PDT by HiTech RedNeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]


To: HiTech RedNeck
And "those who have presumably infringed in the past" couldn't "hide it" already by ditching Linux altogether?

That's a good point, but it's also a "hiding solution" of a completely different magnitude. It would probably be cheaper for most such organizations to just pay off SCO instead of abandoning Linux in favor of another OS, which they presumably would have to buy. So that solution for hiding the evidence is probably not economically practical.

And I'm trying hard to ignore your "Tell me another good joke" type responses in the interests of maintaining a civil debate.

26 posted on 08/19/2003 8:57:51 AM PDT by Joe Bonforte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson