Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [OT] SCO vs. the world

[Tom Lord]

    > From: Miles Bader <address@hidden>

    > Remember, (1) it's copyright that's being claimed, and so as far as I know
    > `your mind is tainted' doesn't apply, 

Sorry, but -- "derived work" is a slippery slope.


    > and (2) the objectional code came from
    > single party, who has fairly well defined channels for interacting with 
linux
    > development (and apparently quite anal internal accounting of such 
thigns).

    > Determining who wrote each line of linux would be very hard, but deciding
    > what code has to be deleted (and how to rewrite it) in this particular 
case
    > is a much, much, much, easier problem.

The fact remains that a lot of code (measured in man-hours not % of
kernel source) very well _might_ have to be deleted and that a lot of
the people best qualified to replace it fail even the basic tests
required from the FSF (e.g. don't read the code you are replacing).

And, it also remains that our favorite vendors, employers of nearly
all the superstars, may owe lots of money.  And some of those have
picked a fight where, according to SCO, negotiation was still on the
table.  

There's a software engineering issue, here, too: regarding single
points of failure.


-t