Toolkit

Story: SCO vs the Linux world…What's a Linux user to do?

• 
• 

Part A:

SCO is doing nothing but making non-enforceable threats!

It seems logical that until a court rules on SCO's IP claims (AND MAYBE AFTER A COURT RULES) that apparent authority, also known as ostensible authority kicks in to protect the innocent 3rd parties from a principle who has acted like SCO!

If, SCO (if looked at as being a principle) were actually found to own a few tid-bits of IP in LINUX (an idea that is totally rejected in the position paper for OSI on the SCO vs. IBM suit –
see http://www.opensource.org/sco-vs-ibm.html
and a position paper, which casts doubt on SCO's position, that was authored by one of the world's leading legal experts on copyright law as applied to software, Professor Eben Moglen of Columbia University. See http://www.osdl.org/docs/osdl_eben_moglen_position_paper.pdf )

…then, just by the fact that they let other "agents" distribute said IP (in downloads or distro form) to innocent 3rd parties... means that said agreements by these "agents" are final and SCO is wrong thinking that they can now go to the 3rd party customers and cause them harm.

Remember that no "agent" ever told the innocent 3rd parties that any potential IP principle (called SCO) was disapproving of them freely using LINUX - and in fact, in all the years that SCO was contributing to LINUX and distributing LINUX, SCO never did disapprove of any distribution of LINUX, using LINUX, upgrading LINUX, or anything with LINUX period.

If SCO wins the suit (hardly likely, dubious-at-best-OS), it is then and only then that they can make claims on ONLY future distribution of LINUX. In fact, SCO could make no claims on LINUX because the GNU GPL forbids any IP that is non-GNU GPL and thus SCO could have no claim because any SCO IP must be cleared out of it in order for LINUX, governed by the GNU GPL, to be LINUX. Any SCO IP in LINUX would have short term affect, as the LINUX code writers would replace this IP very quickly.

Also any kind of SCO IP found in LINUX would NOT affect current LINUX use and/or past downloads or distributions… This reasoning is due to apparent authority, also known as ostensible authority, SCO's obvious LINUX history, and SCO’s obvious exposure to the GNU GPL!

It would seem that the burden of proof is on SCO to prove that SCO IP that they claim is part of LINUX is- a) really SCO's IP, b) is IP that is free from the GNU GPL. It would seem that any current use of LINUX should be as before and that this would only change if the courts rule in favor of SCO! It would seem only logical that such a ruling would only affect LINUX users of any download or acquired distribution after, not before, the court rules (and only if the court rules in favor of SCO).

Fact: SCO is on record as stating that they are not going after LINUX (only IBM at this time) AND so by saying this SCO is saying that they still do not disapprove of LINUX being distributed or used by anyone. It does appear that SCO is saying that the case against IBM does NOT affect any new LINUX installs (even TODAY). SCO seems to be endorsing the continued distribution of LINUX…! And by allowing the continued existence of any agents with apparent authority they are allowing the use in LINUX, of any SCO IP they have contributed via the GNU GPL, and/or have continued to allow via unopposed download or distribution of, from any source (any LINUX/SCO IP agent with SCO's apparent authority)!

REMEMBER THAT SCO OFFICERS HAVE STATED (not too long ago), IN PUBLIC INTERVIEWS, THAT SCO HAS NO IP CLAIM AGAINST LINUX! There has been no legal attempt by SCO to stop LINUX distribution! The licensing tax that SCO has in mind does not apply to holders of current versions of LINUX!

Any and all future upgrades to current LINUX installations would be affected by this apparent authority agency law (also known as ostensible authority), as SCO’s IP "agents, with apparent authority" (LINUX distributors and their web sites) also seemed

• 
• 

• 
• 
• 

Full Talkback thread