How did we get here?
Regardless of how you feel about SCO's IP claims, it is interesting to remember how we got here: Linux began because a university student couldn't afford a Unix OS.
There is no doubt whatsoever that Linus Torvald's effort to create Linux was an effort to clone Unix. Linus wasn't inventing a new operating system; he was deliberately trying to create a Unix-like OS. In that sense at least, this is "theft". I've tried to think of any analogy where someone could set out to deliberately copy a proprietary product and expect to get away with it. It's easy enough to run afoul of someone else's IP if your original intentions were for something entirely different, but when you start out with the idea of creating a knock-off, you are really treading on thin ice.
Yet until this suit, Linux was ignored. Not even ignored: SCO, the apparent holder of these IP rights, even contributed code to Linux! How did this happen? SCO says (quoting from the above referenced article):
SCO's explanation for why it took so long to come forward (another controversial topic) is that it took some time before it discovered what it believes to be misappropriated Unix IP in Linux. The company expected to have the legal leverage necessary to make sure that new or old licensees couldn't undermine their business and, based on that expectation, is now attempting to use that leverage.
Of course there is also the matter that Novell says that they are the ones who own the IP:
Novell on the other hand, claims that when it comes to pre-existing licensees, SCO has no such leverage and that Novell intended it that way when the sale was made, and when it signed both the original contract and the amendment to it.
Now, SCO didn't buy whatever it bought until 1995, so if anybody was going to complain about Linux before that, it would have to be Novell. Novell has been saying it still has the rights, but apparently isn't pursuing them. I'm not entirely clear on why Linux folk find that comforting: yes, Novell has bought Ximian and Suse, but has it said outright "Here Linux, all our IP is yours now"? Nope. So Novell's Linux friendly attitude could change. Conceivably, they could start a suit similar to SCO's whenever they liked.
But never mind that: let's go back to 1995. Admittedly Linux wasn't the big success it is today, but neither was it invisible. Your radar would have to be non-functional to be unaware of Linux in 1995, and certainly neither SCO nor Linux were that clueless. Would you purchase IP rights of any kind without some mention of and concern about an obvious knock-off in the marketplace? Never mind who sold what to whom, is it conceivable that this elephant in the living room could really be ignored? Admittedly it was a smaller elephant then, but it was still bumping into tables and a lot of folks were worrying about the china even then.
So why would SCO buy (or think it was buying) IP that was obviously under attack by a clone? I don't have an answer, but perhaps someone does.
Got something to add? Send me email.
(OLDER) <- More Stuff -> (NEWER) (NEWEST)
Printer Friendly Version
Increase ad revenue 50-250% with Ezoic