[oclug] Case Closed
rod at giffinscientific.com
Wed Jul 30 13:33:44 EDT 2003
Shad Young said:
> On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 12:40:20 -0400 (EDT)
> "Rod Giffin" <rod at giffinscientific.com> wrote:
>> That all started when SCO started having to defend itself against FUD
>> comming from... "Free software advocates" and the Linux community.
> Now whose spreading FUD? You should take a look at the time-line again.
Let me see. SCO's original claim dated March 6th 2003 was filed March
7th. There were no threats against Linux customers and developers at that
time. They were referred to only in context of explaining what Linux is
in their claim.
OSI's initial discrediting of SCO's original claim from one source, which
accuses SCO of making misleading statements - not in respect to Linux, but
in respect to their own IP holdings, and history: it's dated March 10
Several other Linux friendly publications print stories pounding SCO's
claims from various sources. Sometimes directly. Always without first
hand information on what exactly the supposed breach is about. There are
also a couple of reported attacks on SCO's website, SCO claims that it is
because of disgruntled Linux users. Maybe... maybe not.
SCO had basically no response until May 20th, when they sent their first
e-mail outlining what their response may be with respect to Linux. May
May 28th. The day of Novell's "bombshell" which has only been partially
withdrawn. Also the day SCO's lawyer gives the linux community a chance
to back off. "Linux is it's own worst enemy" he says in an interview with
Forbes. In that article, specific references are made to the ongoing ...
well if you don't want to call it fud, call it "disagreement" at the hands
some outspoken Linux and Open Source supporters. The line has been drawn
in the sand.
More information about the OCLUG