Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

SCO, Novell: Grokking Where Credit is Due

Filed under

Two things happened to diffuse this hypothetical chain of events: Novell itself, which surely was already planning to expand its business with the acquisitions of Ximian and SUSE Linux, decided to take the high road and publicly challenge SCO's claims instead of going along with SCO's plan. (Again, it's my speculation that they were even invited, but given the potentially billions of dollars at stake, I have trouble believing that SCO wouldn't privately try to hedge their bets just in case Novell had a valid claim.)

The next thing that ruined SCO's plans? Groklaw.

Had things stayed in the boardrooms and courthouses, I do believe that the outcome of all of these cases might have turned out differently. Facts would have stayed buried. Companies might have been tempted to settle. The sheer arrogance of SCO might have been hidden behind friendly sounding press releases.

That, I'm sure, is the way SCO wanted it to happen. And again, looking at the Linux community in 2003, that's what very likely could have happened. Remember, there was no central Linux organization to respond to this sort of thing. SCO would have quietly maneuvered its way through all of these lawsuits, even the claims made by Novell, and they may have had a better chance.

rest here

Also: The endless SCO saga is finally at an end, and justice has prevailed. But without Groklaw, would it have ended differently?

More in Tux Machines

Intel Cache Allocation Technology / RDT Still Baking For Linux

Not mentioned in my earlier features you won't find in the Linux 4.9 mainline kernel is support for Intel's Cache Allocation Technology (CAT) but at least it was revised this weekend in still working towards mainline integration. Read more Also: Intel Sandy Bridge Graphics Haven't Gotten Faster In Recent Years

Distributing encryption software may break the law

Developers, distributors, and users of Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) often face a host of legal issues which they need to keep in mind. Although areas of law such as copyright, trademark, and patents are frequently discussed, these are not the only legal concerns for FOSS. One area that often escapes notice is export controls. It may come as a surprise that sharing software that performs or uses cryptographic functions on a public website could be a violation of U.S. export control law. Export controls is a term for the various legal rules which together have the effect of placing restrictions, conditions, or even wholesale prohibitions on certain types of export as a means to promote national security interests and foreign policy objectives. Export control has a long history in the United States that goes back to the Revolutionary War with an embargo of trade with Great Britain by the First Continental Congress. The modern United States export control regime includes the Department of State's regulations covering export of munitions, the Treasury Department's enforcement of United States' foreign embargoes and sanctions regimes, and the Department of Commerce's regulations applying to exports of "dual-use" items, i.e. items which have civil applications as well as terrorism, military, or weapons of mass destruction-related applications. Read more

Linux Kernel News

Games for GNU/Linux