[PLUG] The latest on SCO vs. reality

[Jeme A Brelin]

On Thu, 22 May 2003, Rich Shepard wrote:
>    Then they claimed to find hunks of orthodox UNIX code leveraged
>    into Linux somehow, though at this writing they still haven't offered
>    the evidence. Unwilling to sue themselves, they "suspended" their
>    Linux business and warned Linux users about the "potential liability
>    that could rest with them for using such software" while offering to
>    "hold harmless" their own remaining Linux customers.

It seems to me that if SCO owns the patents and copyrights it claims are
implemented or copied in Linux code that the Linux distribution they
created would be de facto licensing of those copyrights and patents under
the GPL.

I know that if _I_ release code under the GPL that contains patents or
copyrights that I own, I can't go around suing people who create or
distribute derivitave work based on my patented or copyrighted code.

How is that not grounds for immediate dismissal of this suit?

J.
-- 
   -----------------
     Jeme A Brelin
    jeme at brelin.net
   -----------------
 [cc] counter-copyright
 http://www.openlaw.org