[NCLUG] Breaking news! SCO is full of crap (big surprise)

[jbass at dmsd.com]

Sean Reifschneider <jafo at tummy.com> writes:
> SCO has not notified anyway, as far as I know, of copyright violation.
> They have notified people of their intent to prove copyright violation.

Anyone here besides myself that understands the legal and political
issues well enough to offer the obvious explanation why this is? In
particular why they are not pressing copyright against IBM?

> Again, I don't have any problems with them demonstrating copyright,
> trade secret, and contractual violations.  That's definitely their
> right.  It is *NOT* their right to shut down the Linux industry
> indefinitely, unless you pay SCO $800 per copy until that time.

SCO did not take on Linux users until the revolt protecting IBM was
well in a frenzy .... in short the Linux community demanded to be one
of the targets in the fight, instead of looking at the corporate greed
behind IBM's and the other major players wrongful actions and doing
the right thing.

John