News & Announcements

Why the GPL Sinks SCO’s Copyright Infringement Claims, Even if it Owned the Copyrights

Editor’s note: This is a very long, but informative article. It’s worth the read. If you are new to the Free Software community, you need to have some understanding of the license that governs it, or at least one of the main licenses.

I’ve started to wonder if Novell or IBM has explained to SCO’s Chapter 11 Trustee Edward Cahn how the GPL works. It cuts through all the other ways SCO is bound to lose, in my view. Then, I thought: why not just explain it myself? You never know. It might prove useful to put it all in one place. So, here goes, SCO and the GPL.

As you may recall, if you’ve been around since 2003, SCO’s position on the GPL has been that while it may have distributed its code under the GPL, it didn’t mean to do it, that it never knowingly distributed Unix or Unixware code under the GPL. I’d like to briefly explain why that excuse doesn’t matter to either Novell or IBM. IBM of course has always taken the position that it hasn’t infringed any copyrights, no matter who owns them. But let’s take SCO’s words at face value, and pretend that they are true. Then how does the GPL moot their claims?

Related Post:  Samsung Chromebook Pro, Chromebook Plus will run Android apps

So you can try to prove me wrong, if you are so inclined, before I begin, I’ll point you to Groklaw’s permanent page on the GPL, where you can find resources to a great deal more information on all versions of the GPL. I’ll be focusing here on GPLv2, the license that Linux code is distributed under.

Related Post:  Samsung Chromebook Pro, Chromebook Plus will run Android apps

What SCO Said:

Here’s how then-SCO executive Chris Sontag explained SCO’s position to CNET in June of 2003:

And LinuxTag said in a statement, “Until a few weeks ago, SCO itself distributed the Linux kernel…as a member of the UnitedLinux alliance. Thus, even if SCO owns parts of the Linux kernel, it has made them into Free Software by distributing them under the GPL.”

Not so, counters SCO’s Sontag.

“The GPL requires the intentional act of the legal copyright holder to affirmatively and knowingly donate the source code to the GPL,” Sontag said. “You can’t inadvertently GPL your code.”

Continue reading at Groklaw.

Subscribe to LinuxBSDos.com

Subscribe to receive the latest articles in your Inbox

Trust me, you'll not be spammed...

Please share:

We Recommend These Vendors and Free Offers

Register now for Blockchain & Cryptocurrency Con 2018, international conference on blockchain technnology in Dallas, TX (USA), Feb. 23-24, 2018. A 50% discount for students.

Best WhatsApp Plus features in Gbwhatsapp latest APK download

Best binary auto trading software reviews by 7binaryoptions.com

Google has got competition, because Presearch is building a blockchain-based search engine controlled by the community. At $0.15 a token, you can participation in Lot 3 of the token sale by clicking here

Open Money is building a solution that will run mainstream software on blockchain tech. Click here to get free tokens that will be the digital currency of the platform

Launch an SSD VPS in Europe, USA, Asia & Australia on Vultr's KVM-based Cloud platform starting at $5:00/month (15 GB SSD, 768 MB of RAM).


Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*