MESSAGE
| DATE | 2003-05-29 |
| FROM | David Sugar
|
| SUBJECT | Re: [hangout] Novell's letter to SCO
|
I think that is basically what they are saying, and even further, in another
section you didn't quote here, that they (Novell) have no interest in suing
anyone, and in particular have no issues with "Linux" (l presume in this
respect they mean with either the Linux kernel or GNU). However, Novell is
talking about copyright as well as patents. I gather from Novell's statement
that SCO has a (non-revokable) "license" to use, distribute, and modify SysV
code, and it may even be, as SCO now claims, an "exclusive" license to
distribute SysV code to others (on Novell's behalf, for which Novell collects
95% of the revenue, as Bruce pointed out seperately), but they do not in fact
hold valid copyright to SysV unix sources, or even, depending on the exact
contract wording involved, potentially to their own modifications.
Certainly if correct, SCO is not going to be able to sue anyone for copyright
or patent infringement. As such, I believe they have essentially made
knowingly false statements to their investors, and this gives the SEC a valid
basis to intervene. The crime is called fraud. These people (from SCO)
should be treated as nothing more than common criminals.
On Wednesday 28 May 2003 11:04 pm, Ruben I Safir wrote:
> Does this mean only Novell can sue IBM for SySV patent claims?
>
> > Importantly, and contrary to SCO's assertions, SCO is not the owner of
> > the UNIX copyrights. Not only would a quick check of U.S. Copyright
> > Office records reveal this fact, but a review of the asset transfer
> > agreement between Novell and SCO confirms it. To Novell's knowledge, the
> > 1995 agreement governing SCO's purchase of UNIX from Novell does not
> > convey to SCO the associated copyrights. We believe it unlikely that SCO
> > can demonstrate that it has any ownership interest whatsoever in those
> > copyrights. Apparently, you share this view, since over the last few
> > months you have repeatedly asked Novell to transfer the copyrights to
> > SCO, requests that Novell has rejected. Finally, we find it telling that
> > SCO failed to assert a claim for copyright or patent infringement against
> > IBM.
____________________________
NYLXS: New Yorker Free Software Users Scene
Fair Use -
because it's either fair use or useless....
NYLXS is a trademark of NYLXS, Inc
|
|
