[oclug] Case Closed
raywood at magma.ca
Wed Jul 30 13:10:11 EDT 2003
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 12:40:20PM -0400, Rod Giffin remarked:
> Raymond Wood said:
> >> 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 al.
> > I disagree. The minute that SCO started threatening law
> > suits over the Linux kernel, and intimidating Linux users
> > with FUD to buy their stupid SCO license so they could "run
> > Linux legally" -- this was when the issue went beyond just
> > SCO and IBM.
> You can disagree, but I'm looking at the timeline. Our FUD
> started first.
IMO you are blaming the victim here Rod. You are also providing
no evidence for what must surely be a rather outrageous claim.
'The Linux community provoked SCO into lashing out against the
Linux kernel'? C'mon...
> There was no threat initially to Linux users
> and customers. Linus Torvalds was mentioned exactly once in
> the initial complaint, and only in the context of being the
> originator of Linux. There was no mention of having to buy a
> SCO license in order to "run Linux legally".
> That all started when SCO started having to defend itself
> against FUD comming from... "Free software advocates" and the
> Linux community.
Without further evidence of your claim, I must dispute its
accuracy. This is not the way I perceived this little drama
unfolding at all. You are the first person I have heard suggest
that the Linux community were the aggressors in this affair.
> Now, SCO has submitted an ammended claim that names Linus
> Torvalds not once, but 6 times and in a _most_ unfriendly
> light. Essentially, well actually they're now saying he was
> either incompetant or complaisant in a breach of their
> intellectual property rights. None of that was in the
> original complaint. It is a complete change of direction in
> this case, with respect to Linux, Linus, and the "Free
> software" community.
On the contrary, it seems to me a continuation of SCO's now
consistent effort to make money from ligitation instead of
Really, it's a little shocking to see a normally level-headed
Linux advocate such as yourself miss the mark to such an extent,
as I believe you have in this case. SCO is not a victim here;
they have chosen to litigate their way out of a bad financial
situation and they are now attacking the entire Linux community
in a very serious way. Please don't continue to trivialize
SCO's aggression towards our community by blaming the victim.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://tux.oclug.on.ca/pipermail/oclug/attachments/20030730/e6067152/attachment.bin
More information about the OCLUG