Topic: SCO License Required ?

[stubbz]

Do we need to worry about the "SCO Intellectual Property License for Linux" Licence?

it applies to the following binaries that sco say have been stolen from UNIX code.


Any part of any Linux file that includes the copyrighted binary interface code
must be removed. Files in Linux version 2.4.21 and other versions that incorporate the
copyrighted binary interfaces include:
include/asm-alpha/errno.h
include/asm-arm/errno.h
include/asm-cris/errno.h
include/asm-i386/errno.h
- 2 -
include/asm-ia64/errno.h
include/asm-m68k/errno.h
include/asm-mips/errno.h
include/asm-mips64/errno.h
include/asm-parisc/errno.h
include/asm-ppc/errno.h
include/asm-ppc64/errno.h
include/asm-s390/errno.h
include/asm-s390x/errno.h
include/asm-sh/errno.h
include/asm-sparc/errno.h
include/asm-sparc64/errno.h
include/asm-x86_64/errno.h
include/asm-alpha/signal.h
include/asm-arm/signal.h
include/asm-cris/signal.h
include/asm-i386/signal.h
include/asm-ia64/signal.h
include/asm-m68k/signal.h
include/asm-mips/signal.h
include/asm-mips64/signal.h
include/asm-parisc/signal.h
include/asm-ppc/signal.h
include/asm-ppc64/signal.h
include/asm-s390/signal.h
include/asm-s390x/signal.h
include/asm-sh/signal.h
include/asm-sparc/signal.h
include/asm-sparc64/signal.h
include/asm-x86_64/signal.h
include/linux/stat.h
include/linux/ctype.h
lib/ctype.c
include/asm-alpha/ioctl.h
include/asm-alpha/ioctls.h
include/asm-arm/ioctl.h
include/asm-cris/ioctl.h
include/asm-i386/ioctl.h
include/asm-ia64/ioctl.h
include/asm-m68k/ioctl.h
include/asm-mips/ioctl.h
include/asm-mips64/ioctl.h
include/asm-mips64/ioctls.h
include/asm-parisc/ioctl.h
include/asm-parisc/ioctls.h
include/asm-ppc/ioctl.h
include/asm-ppc/ioctls.h
include/asm-ppc64/ioctl.h
include/asm-ppc64/ioctls.h
include/asm-s390/ioctl.h
include/asm-s390x/ioctl.h
include/asm-sh/ioctl.h
include/asm-sh/ioctls.h
include/asm-sparc/ioctl.h
include/asm-sparc/ioctls.h
include/asm-sparc64/ioctl.h
include/asm-sparc64/ioctls.h
include/asm-x86_64/ioctl.h
include/linux/ipc.h
include/linux/acct.h
include/asm-sparc/a.out.h
include/linux/a.out.h
arch/mips/boot/ecoff.h
include/asm-sparc/bsderrno.h
include/asm-sparc/solerrno.h
include/asm-sparc64/bsderrno.h
include/asm-sparc64/solerrno.h

The code identified above was also part of a settlement agreement between the
University of California at Berkeley and Berkeley Systems Development, Inc.
(collectively “BSDI”) and UNIX Systems Laboratories, Inc. regarding alleged violations
by BSDI of USL’s rights in UNIX technology. The settlement agreement between USL
and BSDI addressed conditions upon which BSDI could continue to distribute its version
of UNIX, BSD Lite 4.4, or any successor versions, including certain “UNIX Derived
Files” which include the ABI Code.

http://www.sco.com/scosource/linuxlicensefaq.html

Any Comments?

Stubbz

   

[Schotty]

Hello!
Until proven in court OR until asked my SCO then you do not need any license!!!

As a user you are NOT doing anything wrong ie. illegal in using any type of linux unless local laws forbid using it.

So until its proven that SCO owns the rights to the said files then carry on using linux as if SCO doesnt exist.

My opionion :

SCO ........F*** You!

[satovey]

The aforementioned code that SCO claims to own
as intelectual property is being disbuted by
Novell, who sold SCO their license to distribute
their Unix variant. Novell claims that the copyright
ownership to the said code did not transfer to
SCO upon licensing. Furthermore, Novell in it's
license agreement with SCO retained the right to
require SCO to update their end user license
to conform with Novell, and if SCO refuses to do
so, Novell can, on behalf of SCO, update the
SCO end user license.

Now the fact that Novell purchased Suse Linux, what
do you think the chances are of SCO's madrush to legal
action, succeeding?

SCO Moves on big customers March 8 issue of Eweek.
So simply put, don't send any money to SCO until after
the smoke clears. The article also stated that SCO is
losing money and customers. In reading the article,
I got the idea that SCO is trying to use it's EUL to
prevent it's customers from moving from the Unix
platform to a Linux platform. Since SCO is sueing it's
customers to prevent them from moving to a Linux
linux distro, I don't think that SCO will be around
long enough to pick on any of the little guys like
us. And besides that, Linus already said that if the
code that SCO is disbuting is in the Linux Kernal,
and they have a valid claim, he will remove it and
replace it with something better. So my advice is
to wait till the smoke clears.

Another thing you can do if you are realy concerned
is to upgrade your kernal to the 2.6 release. There
is a how to for the SME6.0, does anyone know if this
applies to the 5.6 version?

Thanks Scott

[Anonymous]

SCO Trolls, they're everywhere, they're everywhere.
Crawl back under the bridge trolls.

[msoulier]

Do we need to worry about the "SCO Intellectual Property License for Linux" Licence?

it applies to the following binaries that sco say have been stolen from UNIX code.

While IANAL, my understanding is that SCO's beef is with IBM. They have no right to extort funds from Linux users, and are currently attempting to do it to bolster their pathetic stock for their obsolete business model.

Please don't spread FUD.

Mike