My mistake, I misread "Novel" for "SCO" in that line and spoke from the
position of SCOGs witnesses and the discounted testimony. That would certainly
have altered what I intended to say.
In attempting to cover the logic of
the situation, things are getting more complicated then they need to be which is
adding to the confusion.
So I'll tell ya what. To clarify my position
and cut straight to the chase I'll identify how Tom Harvey could update his
article to clarify any confusion.
1) Change from:
a Canopy
company that held the rights to the Unix computer operating
system.
To:
a Canopy company that held the rights to
the UnixWare computer operating system.
2) And change
from:
for allegedly using SCO’s Unix operating
system
To:
for allegedly using SCO’s UnixWare
operating system
3) And finally change
from:
Unix was sold to another
company.
To:
SCO's Unix Business was sold to
another company.
Three very small changes with the addition of two
words and I fully retract my opinion on the article representation and offer
both yourself and Mr. Harvey full and humble apologies.
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|