 |
| |
 An Open Letter from Darl McBrideAn Open Letter from Darl McBride
 CEO issues another open letter; challenges legal status of GPL with what SCO says are legal precedents that will terminate the idea of copyleft. [SCO] (December 4, 2003)
|
SCO Group Launches Broadside against GPLSCO Group Launches Broadside against GPL
 Open letter by CEO Darl McBride gives view on key issue of US copyright law versus GNU GPL; warns that current legal controversies will rage for at least another 18 months, until original case against IBM goes to trial. [eWeek] (December 4, 2003)
|
PR: SCO Says IBM's Amended Complaint, Based on GPL, is Built on a Shaky FoundationPR: SCO Says IBM's Amended Complaint, Based on GPL, is Built on a Shaky Foundation
 SCO response to IBM countersuit; GPL never faced full legal test, SCO says it will fall in court; SCO continues to base its legal claims on well-settled United States contract and copyright laws. Forum comments. [Linux Today] (September 29, 2003)
|
SCO Says IBM's Amended Complaint, Based on GPL, is Built on a Shaky FoundationSCO Says IBM's Amended Complaint, Based on GPL, is Built on a Shaky Foundation
 SCO press release says nothing about IBM description of SCO conduct; but instead attacks GPL as, in part, created by Free Software Foundation to supplant current US copyright laws. [PR Newswire] (September 29, 2003)
|
Aiming at the GPL?Aiming at the GPL?
 According to Mark Heise of Boies, Schiller, and Flexner; SCO outside law firm, GNU GPL, by which Linux kernel and much other code is licensed, is invalid due to being preempted by US copyright law. Forum comments. [LWN: Linux Weekly News] (August 21, 2003)
|
SCO Defies Logic by Selling Samba under Invalid GPLSCO Defies Logic by Selling Samba under Invalid GPL
 Samba team issued statement on SCO including Samba in its latest release of Unixware. Samba is distributed under GNU GPL. For SCO to keep using open source software when attacking others for such is hypocrisy. [The Inquirer] (August 21, 2003)
|
The GPL Will Win, Claims Law ProfThe GPL Will Win, Claims Law Prof
 Eben Moglen, Professor of Law, Columbia University, FSF pro bono general counsel for last decade, says no need to fear GPL being tested in US Court, astonished by latest SCO legal tactic to reject GPL validity. [The Register] (August 19, 2003)
|
SCO Does Neat U-turn on GPLSCO Does Neat U-turn on GPL
 Reader email shows that SCO-Caldera changed their policy about GPL quickly, documents this with quote from SCO website: this material is provided AS-IS and at no charge. [The Inquirer] (August 15, 2003)
|
SCO's Own Pages Suggest GPL KnowledgeSCO's Own Pages Suggest GPL Knowledge
 Reader letters with links and quotes from SCO website showing SCO use of GPL principles, with some insightful comments. [The Inquirer] (August 15, 2003)
|
SCO to Argue General Public License InvalidSCO to Argue General Public License Invalid
 Today's Wall Street Journal quotes SCO outside lawyer Mark Heise saying GPL is preempted by US federal copyright law; GPL license lets software and work derived from it be copied by anyone at no charge. [The Inquirer] (August 14, 2003)
|
Did SCO Open Unix Source Code?Did SCO Open Unix Source Code?
 Some organizations argue SCO shipping a Linux product undermines its current attack on Linux intellectual property underpinnings; SCO says argument baseless; issue spotlights key tenet of GPL governing Linux kernel. [CNET News.com] (June 11, 2003)
|
SCO Might Recycle AT&T's Unix BlunderSCO Might Recycle AT&T's Unix Blunder
 Reports say SCO may have violated GNU General Public License, GPL; eWeek says parts of Linux kernel code were copied into Unix System V source tree by former or current SCO employees. [The Inquirer] (June 11, 2003)
|
Did SCO Violate the GPL?Did SCO Violate the GPL?
 Some open source community members claim SCO violated GNU GPL by copying source code from Linux kernel into SCO Unix Linux Kernel Personality feature without releasing changes publicly or showing attribution copyright notice. [eWeek] (June 10, 2003)
|
|
|
|
|
|
