SCO Doesn't Like GPL Either

"The Free Software Foundation is the only entity that can enforce the GPL so, in effect, IBM is barred from trying to enforce the GPL with SCO," wrote Blake Stowell, a SCO spokesman, in an e-mail response to questions.

SCO's filings also assert that "the GPL violates the U.S. Constitution, together with copyright, antitrust and export control laws." [1]

Is it just me, or does anyone else think the GPL's days are numbered...

[1] SCO: IBM cannot enforce GPL. Robert McMillan. http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/10/27/HNscoenforce_1.html

9 Comments

  • Your blog is like a reverse Slashdot.



    Maybe you could title it "Uninformed childish trolling, from a .NET perspective.

  • Quoting SCO does nothing for your credability.

  • I didn't say I agreed with them. I do, however, think that the lawsuit has the potential to make some significant legal decisions around the GPL though. If SCO and IBM continue this battle, it may be the first really good test of the GPL in court.

  • Since most everyone else seems to have a basic understanding of copyright law. I can answer your question by saying, yes, it's just you.



    Your seeming want to force this programmer who has GPLed his code to either give up my rights in regard to my code, or into some legal limbo where I have to sue companies already using my GPLed code to retain my rights, is insulting.

    Or haven't you thought that far ahead? If you don't like the GPL, DON'T USE MY CODE.



    As soon as SCO gets handed it's ass on a platter by IBM, the GPL will be strengthened and Linux will be further legitimized.

  • The problem with SCO's attack is it could in essence also attack EULA's, such as Microsoft's. If one argues that a license is not compatible with copyright law, which is what SCO is in essence doing, then not only is the GPL in trouble but all software licenses. All the GPL does is grants you certain rights regarding usage of the software. It is is in essence a reverse EULA, other than its viral components.



    Personally, I think SCO is grasping at thin air. They don't have a case and they know it. Their tactic is to delay, delay, delay by whatever means, including throwing out bogus arguments that have to be addresses prior to addressing the real issue. It is my opinion that SCO's motive is to drive up its stock price and then the owners will dump the stock and get rich (strategically so as not to trigger any insider trader reviews). They know that SCO is finished. They are just trying to get some money out of it before it is buried.



  • So where it to find,

  • Help me to find the,

Comments have been disabled for this content.