Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines

ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

SCO does not own the UNIX copyrights | 401 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

SCO does not own the UNIX copyrights

Authored by: Kilz on Tuesday, May 28 2013 @ 09:11 PM EDT

Your wrong. Your point is moot

Since SCO does not have the copyrights to UNIX they have no
control over the licensees or what has been included in their
flavor. 0, ziltch, nada, none.

They lack standing to bring forth anything.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

The code IBM placed under the GPL for the file system was and is in AIX

Authored by: PJ on Tuesday, May 28 2013 @ 09:23 PM EDT

I don't think it's relevant, because SCO
doesn't own the UNIX copyrights. And Novell
was given the right, by the court, to
waive any contract violations, if any.

I reread SCO's filing the last time it
tried to reopen the case, and its position
was that while it has no UNIX copyrights,
it would like to use UnixWare code that
they allegedly wrote after 1995.

The problem with that is that, as IBM pointed
out, SCO never yet showed any UnixWare code
it claimed was infringed or misused. So
SCO was trying to start the case over, you
could say, with a brand new claim.

Surprised? Not I.

Whether the court will allow it, we'll have to
wait and see.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )