[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [FYI] SCO plant Linux-Lizenzen fuer Anwender



On 21 Jul 2003, at 11:31, Rigo Wenning wrote:

> AT (fast Deutsch für den deutschen Markt ;) und Verfügbarkeit via HTTP
> 1.0 sprechen schon für eine Verletzung der Anordnungen. 
> 
> RE-Kriegskasse: 
> 
> Gibt es eine Liste von Linux-Unternehmen in DE (z.B. Suse etc)
> Kann man die Anschreiben und für ein gemeinsames Projekt gewinnen? 
> 
> Axel: Zumindest eine Projekt-Outline brauchst Du bevor Du auf eine
> Kriegskasse hoffen kannst.

Wenn die SCO-Vorwuerfe nicht stimmen, nehme man 1 Rechtsanwalt 
(nicht: Patentanwalt!) und starte z.B. eine negative 
Feststellungsklage.

ABER: Siehe unten!


http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/61/31859.html  

------------------------------ CUT ---------------------------------

SCO says it's time for Linux users to pay up

By Ashlee Vance in Chicago

Posted: 21/07/2003 at 15:47 GMT

SCO is giving the "tainted" Linux users out there a way to clean up 
their filthy ways via a licensing program that will begin in the 
coming weeks.  

[...]

After making "no contribution" to the 2.2 Linux kernel, large vendors 
began dumping hundreds of Unix files into the OS in the 2.4 and 
upcoming 2.6 Linux kernels, according to SCO. This code has made it 
possible for Linux to run well not just on the two processor servers 
where it got its start but on eight, 16, 32 and 64-way boxes.  

SCO is demanding that enterprise users pay for this SMP technology, 
but why?  

There are but a few Intel-based boxes that size in existence, and 
IBM, the main target of SCO, does not even scale to 64 processors as 
of yet. Linux is most often found on small systems or on clusters of 
servers. The number of customers benefiting from this Unix code is 
quite slim.  

Still, Linux customers of all shapes and sizes are to pay for all the 
bells and whistles in the code. SCO says home users and small-time 
players aren't on its immediate legal horizon, but contaminated 
corporate users need to fess up.  

"We have a solution here that gets you clean," McBride said, in a 
conference call.  

SCO suggests that the dirtiest players of all are companies such as 
IBM and Red Hat that let users purchase Linux without providing an OS 
warranty. SCO continues to put pressure on IBM to help its customer 
base out and take on the Linux IP costs.  

SCO also added a little pressure to Linus Torvalds. Up to this point, 
SCO has been attacking IBM on contractual issues which left Torvalds 
out of the fray. With the new copyright claims, however, SCO says 
Torvalds may come under attack.  

"As of today, it is a different game," McBride said. "We are not 
saying Linus created the problems, but he inherited them."  

SCO claims it has a well thought out plan for licensing the Unix IP 
but remains reluctant to provide any details on the costs a business 
may face. The lack of information here leaves a nasty air of intrigue 
hanging over the matter, and we think SCO should speak up sooner 
rather than later. ®  

------------------------------ CUT ---------------------------------

Wenn die Linux-Community tatsaechlich bei den Kernel-Sourcen im 
Bereich SMP-Support urheberrechtsmaessig geschlampt haben sollte, 
waere das schon ziemlich oberpeinlich. Dann bliebe wohl nur noch 
Schadensbegrenzung, naemlich so schnell wie moeglich einen neuen 
Kernel backen ohne die inkriminierten Sourcebestandteile.

--AHH 

--AHH

-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: debate-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: debate-help@lists.fitug.de