bucy wrote:
] ] At SCO's annual reseller show, the company's executives
] ] put up a couple of slides as a way of demonstrating how
] ] Unix code had been "stolen" and put into Linux. The two
] ] slides were photographed and have since appeared on Heise
] ] Online; see them here and here. The escape of these
] ] slides has allowed the Linux community to do something it
] ] has been craving since the beginning of the SCO case:
] ] track down the real origins of the code that SCO claims
] ] as its own. The results, in this case, came quick and
] ] clear. They do not bode well for SCO.

Actually, I disagree. They bode very well for SCO. All this discussion about the code being old, and being published in a text book, is meaningless. Its still copyrighted AT&T code, which is what SCO bought. The only concern of interest is the BSD licence.

1. This code as included in linux before the linux code was release by SCO under the BSD license.

2. This code does not contain SCO copyright notices, and therefore is not legal under the BSD license.

Silly? Yes. But legal.

RE: LWN: Why SCO won't show the code