[Luni]-understanding the Linux/SCO court case

[Matthew Landry]

On Fri, Jun 06, 2003 at 11:55:18AM -0400, SqrFolkDnc at aol.com wrote:
> On another issue
	Not really another issue at all, actually.
> 
> Why are companies running Unix other than SCO (or IBM) Unix not at risk of 
> being sued for not being "properly" licensed?  That's how copywrite violators 
	Because this is not a copyright case. The suit against IBM alleges
breach of contract and disclosure of trade secrets. Anyone who doesn't have
a Unix(tm) source license necessarily has no contract to breach and no
trade secrets to reveal, and therefore is in no danger whatsoever of being
sued this way. Likewise no code originating from an author who isn't in
posession of that license is ever going to be encumbered, even in the worst
case. (Well...the worst realistically imaginable case, anyway...I suppose
it's always POSSIBLE that the entire court system wakes up one morning and
decides Linux is so odious that every judge in the country is going to
completely ignore the law in order to punish people who use it and develop
for it...but even in the present political climate I think that's so
farfetched as to be unworthy of serious consideration.)

	Besides...like I said, there's always BSD. Our legal ducks have
been in a row since before most of the mainstream had ever heard of Linux.
:)
-- 
Matthew Landry              mbl at lelnet.com                       O-
LEL Network Services                           Anti-Stupid Talisman
"You don't have to outrun the bear. Just outrun the slowest hiker."