[oclug] Case Closed
rod at giffinscientific.com
Wed Jul 30 13:06:46 EDT 2003
Shad Young said:
> On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 12:15:57 -0400 (EDT)
> "Rod Giffin" <rod at giffinscientific.com> wrote:
>> Basically it originated as a contract dispute over intellectual
>> property rights between SCO and IBM. It should have stayed a contract
>> dispute between SCO and IBM and the only reason it didn't was because
>> of FUD, statements, and actions by the LUGS, Open Source advocates et
> Horse shit. That its 100 percent total crap. SCO started a smear
> campaign. They threatened companies with out disclosure. It is not an
> SCO vs IBM fight, its SCO vs everybody as they are the ones doing all
> the sabre rattling.
No Shad, I'm telling you that WE started the smear campaign by getting
involved. Check it out. SCO's ammended claim, and the beginning of their
smear campaign came AFTER certain high profile individuals made certain
high profile comments. I'm not disputing with you that they are engaged
in a smear camapign. I'm disputing with you whether elements of the Linux
community may have started it.
>> I've spent the better part of the last 14 days examining kernel
>> sources and modules. I can tell you there is an enormous number of
>> files which have IBM banners in the copyright - yes numbering perhaps
>> in the hundreds.
>> I can't tell if those same files are based or derived on anything.
>> Without knowing what intellectual property and knowledge passed into
>> IBM's hands, it is _impossible_ for anybody to say whether or not
>> SCO's claim has any validity _OR_ not. So, anything said by us is
>> simply FUD in our own right.
> The CLUE group is working to stop the spread of misinformation being
> spread and try to halt any damage that may be caused by SCO's actions.
> Actions that are almost universally condemned as reprehensible and
Like, calling them "bastards" in public isn't a pretty reprehensible
statement? Two wrongs do not make a right.
I'd like to point out that I never mentioned CLUE at all. Wasn't even
thinking of them until just after I read this paragraph. But just to set
the record straight, I've reviewed some of your discussions and it does
appear that CLUE is at least trying to take the high road, with the
exception of a relatively short list of wierd names they were
contemplating giving a mailing list.
>> I'm not saying they're unfriendly towards Linux. I'm not even saying
>> we should take up SCO's banner. I'm just saying that this issue
>> should have been left as a simple contract dispute between SCO and
>> IBM. SCO and IBM are the experts in their respective IP holdings, not
> Nobody that I'm working with is interested in proving or disproving IP
> claims, were interested in halting damaging misinformation.
Fine. Then work to halt damaging information on *both* sides. Take the
high road Shad.
More information about the OCLUG