MESSAGE
| DATE | 2003-05-19 |
| FROM | David Sugar
|
| SUBJECT | Re: [hangout] Microsoft to license Unix code
|
Consider this...Microsoft cannot buy SCO, after all, there were some specific
issues that forced them to sell it and xenix off in the first place. They
certainly cannot appear to "pay" SCO directly to launch or sustain its
lawsuit. While certainly they did not seem to feel obligated to license from
SCO before, what if they suddenly decide to "license" from SCO, and likely at
an inflated price? On the surface that avoids at least the direct legal
liability and anti-trust aspects of "paying" SCO or it's employees to do
things against GNU/Linux. I would be curious about what they are "licensing"
exactly, and at what cost, and why they did not license these things before.
On Monday 19 May 2003 08:38 am, Inker, Evan wrote:
> OK, I've seen it all Now. Someone just cover me over with dirt.......
>
> Excerpt "Late Sunday, Microsoft general counsel Brad Smith said acquiring
> the license from SCO "is representative of Microsoft's ongoing commitment
> to respecting intellectual property and the IT community's healthy exchange
> of IP through licensing. This helps to ensure IP compliance across
> Microsoft solutions and supports our efforts around existing products like
> services for Unix that further Unix interoperability."
>
> When did MS ever care about IP rights? They have been bastardizing software
> from VMS, OS/2, BSD, and Unix Camps for years!
>
> Microsoft to license Unix code
> By Scott Ard > Unix code>
> Staff Writer, CNET News.com
> May 18, 2003, 10:45 PM PT
>
> Microsoft will license the rights to Unix technology from SCO Group, a move
> that could impact the battle between Windows and Linux in the market for
> computer operating systems.
> According to a statement from Microsoft, the company will license SCO's
> Unix patents and the source code. That code is at the heart of a $1 billion
> lawsuit between SCO and IBM , which is
> aggressively pushing Linux as an alternative to Windows in corporate back
> shops.
>
> Microsoft's Windows has a monopoly in the market for desktop operating
> systems, with a market share greater than 90 percent. Linux, which has been
> developed by thousands of contributors and can be freely obtained, has
> caught on as a worthy competitor in the market for corporate servers. In
> the past two years, Microsoft has repeatedly labeled Linux as a threat to
> the Redmond, Wash.-based computing giant, partly because of its low cost.
>
> Late Sunday, Microsoft general counsel Brad Smith said acquiring the
> license from SCO "is representative of Microsoft's ongoing commitment to
> respecting intellectual property and the IT community's healthy exchange of
> IP through licensing. This helps to ensure IP compliance across Microsoft
> solutions and supports our efforts around existing products like services
> for Unix that further Unix interoperability."
>
> Unix was invented more than 30 years ago by AT&T's Unix Systems
> Laboratories. In many ways Linux works similarly to Unix, making it
> relatively easy to translate Unix software to Linux.
>
> AT&T sold the Unix intellectual property to Novell Networks, which in turn
> sold it to the Santa Cruz Operation. Caldera International, a seller of
> Linux, then acquired from SCO the Unix rights and two SCO products,
> OpenServer and UnixWare. Then last year, Caldera changed its name to SCO
> Group to reflect the fact that most of its revenue came from its SCO
> business and not from the Linux products.
>
> But SCO has recently alleged that parts of the Unix source code have been
> copied into Linux , and it is seeking fees
> from Linux users. In March, SCO sued IBM for $1 billion, alleging that Big
> Blue had used SCO's Unix code in Linux. IBM, along with Hewlett-Packard,
> has been a major backer of Linux. Last week, SCO escalated the battle by
> sending hundreds of letters to large corporations
> warning them that their use of Linux could
> infringe on SCO's intellectual property.
> SCO's letter stated, in part, "We believe that Linux infringes on our Unix
> intellectual property and other rights. We intend to aggressively protect
> and enforce these rights. Legal liability that may arise from the Linux
> development process may also rest with the end user."
>
> Some analysts said the move was an attempt by SCO to be acquired by another
> company--possibly Microsoft, IBM or another firm with a stake in the
> matter. "I guess suing IBM wasn't enough to get them acquired, so (the
> letters are) the next stage," Illuminata analyst Gordon Haff said.
>
> Microsoft's public disdain of Linux stretches back more than two years.
>
> In March 2001, Microsoft Senior Vice President Craig Mundie said releasing
> source code into the public domain is
> "unhealthy," causes security risks and "as history has shown, while this
> type of model may have a place, it isn't successful in building a mass
> market and making powerful, easy-to-use software broadly accessible to
> consumers."
>
> A few months later, in an interview with CNET News.com, Microsoft Chairman
> Bill Gates sought to warn corporate users
> about the GNU General Public License
> , which Linux is distributed under. "Some of our source codes are out there
> and very available, like Windows CE," Gates said. "Some generally require a
> license, like Windows itself. We have no objection to free software, which
> has been around forever. But we do think there are problems for commercial
> users relative to the GPL, and we are just making sure people understand
> the GPL.
>
> "Unfortunately, that has been misconstrued in many ways. It's a topic that
> you can leap on and say, 'Microsoft doesn't make free software.' Hey, we
> have free software; the world will always have free software. I mean, if
> you characterize it that way, that's not right. But if you say to people,
> 'Do you understand the GPL?' And they'll say, 'Huh?' And they're pretty
> stunned when the Pac-Man-like nature of it is described to them."
>
> The next stage in the fight between SCO and IBM could occur next month--SCO
> has threatened to revoke IBM's Unix license on June 13.
> News.com's Michael Kanellos contributed to this report.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Evan
>
>
>
>
> ***************************************************************************
>* This message contains confidential information and is intended only for
> the individual or entity named. If you are not the named addressee you
> should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.
> Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received
> this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system.
> E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free
> as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive
> late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not
> accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this
> message which arise as a result of e-mail transmission.
> If verification is required please request a hard-copy version.
> This message is provided for informational purposes and should not
> be construed as an invitation or offer to buy or sell any securities or
> related financial instruments.
> GAM operates in many jurisdictions and is
> regulated or licensed in those jurisdictions as required.
> ***************************************************************************
>*
>
> ____________________________
> NYLXS: New Yorker Free Software Users Scene
> Fair Use -
> because it's either fair use or useless....
> NYLXS is a trademark of NYLXS, Inc
____________________________
NYLXS: New Yorker Free Software Users Scene
Fair Use -
because it's either fair use or useless....
NYLXS is a trademark of NYLXS, Inc
|
|
