"I have not heard about anyone rethinking an order based on this," says Larry Augustin, the chairman of VA Software. "I haven't seen anyone express a fear. The only thing I have seen is people say we need to be careful about where source code comes from -- and that statement was true in the past and it's just as true now."-- Larry Augustin, 2003-06-03

"I don't think anyone knows how it's going to play out, and I believe in the end it may start to be troublesome in sales. But I have not heard of any sales where it has been a problem so far. And I can easily see that where the customer may get antsy and say, 'I don't want to get sued if I buy this thing,' what would happen in this case is it might only delay a sale. In the end I think IBM starts indemnifying its customers. It starts to say, 'Listen, this is bullshit but we understand your concerns about this and if anything happens, we'll take the hit for you.'"-- Jonathan Eunice, 2003-06-03

"I'm no lawyer, but I suspect there is a little bit of aggressive flippancy in that response," says Jonathan Eunice, an analyst at Illuminata, a technology research firm in New Hampshire. Eunice has been closely following the SCO case, and he says that IBM's response "does signal a feeling that they think this is not a serious lawsuit. If IBM thought, 'We may have a material problem here -- golly, they may have a point!' I think IBM would take it more obviously seriously."-- Jonathan Eunice, 2003-06-03

"Let's say that IBM never touched Linux. So Linux would probably be less successful because IBM's stamp of approval was key in getting corporate approval for it -- but IBM doesn't deserve much credit for the quality of the Linux kernel as its stands today. Both HP and IBM have contributed to the 2.6 version, the forthcoming version, so you could make a claim about a future version of Linux if you like. But for the current version -- Linux got good fast long before IBM had a broad systematic commitment to it."-- Jonathan Eunice, 2003-06-03

"I frankly don't think that people are going to make that big of a deal of it -- as soon as the actual evidence of what SCO claims to have been copied is out there, then those sections of Linux are going to be replaced with unambiguous original code effectively immediately."

... "And that's the apparent reason why SCO is sitting on the code," Marti says. "The kernel developers, if they find out what it is, they'll say, 'We'll re-implement it.'"-- Don Marti, 2003-06-03

"Our agreement with SCO is independent of any other industry action and solely designed for the benefit of our customers and our products,"-- Microsoft PR, 2003-06-03

"I didn't get the impression that they were going to settle this case," Raymond says. "And I told Dan, 'We want you to crush these guys. You go after them foot, horse and marines. And we will cheer.'"-- Eric S. Raymond, 2003-06-03

"Is it appropriate for someone to take your work that you do for Salon and put it in another publication without attribution and with someone else's name on it? The obvious answer is no. What if someone takes your research and the effort you put into your work and then munges it around -- changes the paragraphs and the words around so it doesn't look like it's the same work, although it's effectively your work? Is that appropriate? Still the answer is no."-- Chris Sontag, 2003-06-03

"What we're talking about is showing Unix System V code, and we have strict confidentiality with that and it has to be maintained," he says. "But we do realize and understand that people want to see that we have proof, and we are going to be making that proof available as soon as we can. We'll probably make it available to some people" -- for instance, financial analysts or reporters -- "under NDA so they can make their own evaluations."-- Chris Sontag, 2003-06-03