>The other fallacy the softies love to promote is that Unix code was used in Linux. Ok, you softies make the assertion again without evidence.....so where's the proof.
"That's the key question in the imbroglio over SCO's claims that IBM, among others, improperly used Unix code in developing Linux. To be honest, it's also the one question that the open-source community--or at least a fairly vocal subset of it--largely refuses to address.
For all the pleadings and letters that will emerge from this maelstrom, SCO's claims are fairly simple: It owns the bulk of the intellectual property underlying Unix, and recently, some of its code has been spied in Linux. Actually, make that quite a bit of it, says SCO.
"I can see getting three, four, five, lines of code identical," said Chris Sontag, senior vice president of the Lindon, Utah-based company, pointing to a nearly full page of allegedly copied code. "If it was a few lines, I'd give it to you."
And it's not just the code. Programmer comments embedded in Linux--quick, English-language descriptions that aren't subject to mathematical or programming rules--are identical to those found in SCO's Unix code, according to SCO. There's even a typo in one of the commentaries in Unix System V that also appears in a Linux commentary, Sontag said.
Extracting the controversial code is not really a feasible solution. Because of the way intellectual property (IP) laws work, derivative products that use the allegedly pilfered code are also subject to liability. Anyone who bundles suspect products, or uses them, is also conceivably on the hook."
>>>Carnegie, Rockefeller, Kennedy,
>I think they all did illegal stuff to get rich. Joe Kennedy was an illegal drug dealer (alcohol during prohibition).
>Legal or illegal there are often good things that happen with the large acculation of wealth by monopolies.
Many first generation fortunes were made by hard driving individuals that in many instances played hardball in their business dealings, including some that may have or did skirt the law.
My only point was if one removed all of the charitable money given by less than pristine individuals it would be quite significant. Thus our friend Flicka (Click), painting Gates as some kind of monster that should not be allowed to donate to charity is ridiculous.
>Still, in Microsoft's case -- where is the basic research. There is none. Dell is not a technology company. Maybe Microsoft is not a technology company either.
There is nothing illegal about not carrying out basic research that I know of. Today, Microsoft spends a lot on research, some basic, some applied.
>It's a matter of two things: scale, and whether your money was obtained legally.
I personally think Gates money WAS obtained very legally.
That being said, if you removed all of the money donated to charity obtained by questionable means it would be quite a lot.
Carnegie, Rockefeller, Kennedy, the list goes on.
You are such a fool!
>I have to agree with that... Linux didn't steal code... IBM STOLE THE CODE and PUT IT INTO LINUX.
Ah Zog, but it takes two to tango.
Linus had to sign off on kernel upgrades, and the so called open eyes should have known better than to allow IBM to put ripped off code into Linux.
I do not feel sorry for most of the Linuxheads (there may be a few exceptions).
Remember for many of them their goal has always been the eradication of Microsoft from the face of the earth.
>Your moniker is the biggest lie ever. And you expect sypathy for liars like yourself? I don't think so. Got proof??.....no I didn't think so either. You are one sad sack of shit.
Good posts are worth repeating:
Frodo, you are a poster child for Linux:
"One of the things that most concerns me, because it was major failing in previous anti-establishment (read "anti-Microsoft") initiatives, is the behavior of the most visible advocates for these alternative platforms. Microsoft has clearly been blessed with challengers who apparently never learned not to run around blindfolded with sharp objects pointed at their own hearts.
Many Linux users are outspoken and militant. Like their OS/2, MacOS, and Unix predecessors and counterparts, they make personal attacks and broad public statements. Some avid Linux defenders make statements that are unprofessional, and filled with words we wouldn't accept in the workplace. These defenders are clearly doing damage to the credibility of their effort."
>>"Tell you who else is going to get burned in this whole mess are governments that jumped on the Linux bandwagon for nationalistic and not rational reasons."
>microsoft will be happy to bail them out I'm sure.
True, but it may well set those countries back several years, and could even cause political problems, as voters come to recognize they were sold a bill of goods that led to implementation of an inferior IT setup under an international IP legal cloud.
Many governments want to be IT powers, but if they studied the principle of comparative advantage, they would realize it makes scant sense to strive for this, and should focus on the advantage they are able to offer in whatever endeavor.
What good does it do to have France pushing Mandrake, Germany SuSE, China Red Flag, and whatever other in country Linux distribution, when it is a given that although the underlying Linux kernel may be the same, interoperability due to customization causes issues?
Multi-country Linux distributions pushed by governments equals a growing tower of babel quagmire.
>it will likely be a giant cluster fuck of lawsuits.
>so much for peace and love and free software.
The malcontents that formed the basis of the Linux and open source movement have been pushed aside as commercialization happens.
They are increasingly dupes.
Everyone was sold a bill of goods that Linux was rapidly scaling due to many eyes around the world making it so, when in fact IBM labs was adding ripped off proven Unix code.
Tell you who else is going to get burned in this whole mess are governments that jumped on the Linux bandwagon for nationalistic and not rational reasons.
Munich may never recover!
>I'll have fun watching the countersuits.
Really, who will fund them, Tux the penguin?
Except for IBM there are no deep pockets to fund contracted litigation.
Besides, sue me, sue you over a long period means a death cloud hanging over Linux.
No IT manager in their right mind will bet the farm on a Linux/open source solution.
Nope, the free ride for Linux is finito, done, over with.
Your side cheered for lawsuits and government intervention when it came to Microsoft, so now you must live with what many of us recognized as a dangerous road to go down for the IT industry.
Have fun, I will.
>Litigation sucks when the rifle is aimed at you doesn't it?
Sure does, and right now it is aimed squarely at open source, Linux, IBM.
Have fun, I will.
What I wonder is what all of the companies like Macromedia and others that bought off on Java will do?
There really is no reason for Java developers to exist anymore.
litigation sucks when the rifle is aimed at you doesn't it?
Of course when AOL/SUNW/IBM/RNWK/NSCP, Orovile Hatch, Klein, Miller, Blumenthal, the press, were on their Microsoft antitrust witch hunt you applauded and cheered.
You wanted government intervention and litigation back then, opening a pandora's box, so live with it now that LinSux is under the gun.
>What did McNuttHead learn at Harvard? He couldn't compete so he learned to LITIGATE
>His stock will go to zero while he is bitching about Bill Gates and Ballmer.
It amazes me that he is still CEO.
One wonders for how much longer.
As I posted earlier, it has been a great June for Microsoft, and this is icing on the cake.
Can you say C#?
U.S. appeals court sides with Microsoft on Java
Thursday June 26, 2:41 pm ET
WASHINGTON, June 26 (Reuters) - A federal appeals court on Thursday overturned a ruling that would have forced Microsoft Corp. (NasdaqNM:MSFT - News) to incorporate Sun Microsystems Inc (NasdaqNM:SUNW - News)'s Java programming language in the Windows operating system.
The three-judge panel in Richmond, Virginia, said a lower court judge had erred by ordering Microsoft to carry its rival's software, a penalty the lower court judge said was necessary to make up for Microsoft's past misdeeds.
The lower court judge, U.S. District Judge J. Frederick Motz, was assigned cases arising from the landmark government antitrust suit against Microsoft filed in 1998. He concluded in a Dec. 23 ruling that Sun had a good chance of winning its private case against Microsoft."
>on that we agree. it sickens me to watch a great man like gates have to kiss up to those weasels.
It is an unfortunate fact of life for all large companies that they either feed the Washington/state/and global political money and schmooze machine or find themselves blindsided by little matters like antitrusts cases.
It is akin to a legalized extortion racket.
But Gates now knows he has to play this game, as it is cheaper than the alternative.
Musty, always the 'toon.
I applaud White House security for being vigilant in their efforts.
BTW, there was so much disprespect, that he also met with the Veep.
Wonder if Ridge pledged a big Homeland Security contract?
>Gates is wearing a toupee these days? I didn't know that!
Hmmm, I should have figured with your Bill envy you would notice such details (if even true).
Your wall is likely plastered with Bill and Steve photos.
>IF he knew it was copied code AND THE PERSON SUBMITTING THE CODE DIDN'T OWN THE COPYRIGHT TO IT, it would not have been allowed in the kernel!
Well, SCO is submitting clear evidence of ripped off code in Linux, so it appears Linus DID allow it.
If found guility in a U.S. court of law Linus will be quickly shown the Atlantic ocean and sent packing to Finland.
to 4 star chief software provider!
I am sure the Navy and Air Force will soon be giving them promotions too.
What a glorious month, IBM and Linux on the ropes for IP theft, Uncle Sam awarding multi-year big dollar contracts, settlements on lawsuits.
It really does not get much better for the world's greatest software and IT company.
June 2003, Softies +100, bashers -50.