[NTLUG:Discuss] SCO History article -- SCO v. IBM != SCO v. Linux IP

[Kevin Hulse]

--- "Bryan J. Smith" <b.j.smith at ieee.org> wrote:
> From: Will Senn <will_senn at comcast.net>
[deletia]
> IBM customers trying to buy HP Proliant DL585
> (quad-Opteron) servers
> running Linux/x86-64  are feeling it right now.  IBM

Odd then that an Oracle DBA interested in running RAC
on AIX would find so much more information on how to
deploy on Linux/x86 when searching at ibm.com. 

> doesn't want Linux
> to invade its Power/AIX5L space.  So now Linux is
> "in its way" as well.
> 
> There is a lesson to be learned from this. 
> Unfortunately, too many
> Linux bigots are missing the "big picture."  SCO v.
> IBM is _none_ of our
> business.  However, SCO v. Linux IP is.
> 
> > Well now, that's sort of true, but they track all
> related developments 
> > these days and the contract dispute is there as
> well.
> 
> Of course, because SCO _stupidly_ made addendeums to
> it about Linux IP.
> Why?  PR.  If they can win against IBM on the
> Monterey stuff, they
> _hope_ the "smokescreen" they've built up will
> causes everyone ass-u-me
> that they have won against Linux IP.

     You must have some VERY selective memory. SCO has
been claiming that IBM contaminated the Linux kernel
from DAY ONE. This slanders both IBM and the Linux
community in a manner than neither can tolerate. The
"crime" is just to egregious to allow the accusation
to be taken lightly.

     This case has NEVER been about IBM's promised
collaboration with SCO.

     Have they even amended their Monterrey cause of
action even at this late date?