[olug] SCOx Sues A Customer

[Jeff Hinrichs]

Sean Kelly said:
> On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 09:57:18PM -0600, Phil Brutsche wrote:
>> Jeff Hinrichs wrote:
>> >FreeBSD [...] fought AT&T some time ago and prevailed
>
> I am not closely following the SCO affair, but I'll take a shot at
> replying to this.
>
> At one point, SCO said they believed that "UNIX System V provided the
> basic building blocks for all subsequent computer operating systems,"
> and "there may or may not be issues" with FreeBSD.
>
> There is not, and never has been, System V code in BSD. BSD was started
> around V6, not V5.
>
> See http://www.daemon.org/bsd-releases/misc/USL-lawsuit
>
> And here are some legal documents:
> http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/who/dmr/bsdi/bsdisuit.htm
>
>> <potentially faulty understanding of history>
>> Actually, UC Berkeley did, which is where 4.4BSD Lite (Lite 2?) came
>> from.  386BSD re-implemented the missing files from 4.4BSD Lite, and
>> Free/Net BSD took off from there.
>
> 4.4BSD-Lite2 was a bugfix release of 4.4BSD-Lite.
>
> Check out /usr/share/misc/bsd-family-tree on the FreeBSD box nearest
> you. Quite interesting.
>
>> </potentially faulty understanding of history>
>
>> But anyways... you think that's gonna stop 'em?  Many of SCOs claims
>> against Linux are backed by questionable logic (logic contradicted by
>> AT&T's "successor in interest", Novell) and they've taken on what is
>> arguably one of the biggest companies in the industry (IBM) to try to
>> get those claims validated.
>
> The final settlement was not public, so it is hard to say what legal
> grounds exist to prevent SCO from coming after BSD. However, this
> statement comes from Jordan Hubbard replying to someone asking where to
> find the settlement informatioN:
>
>      You can't.  A provision of the settlement agreement was that
>      none of the signatories could publish the settlement agreement. If
> I remember correctly, Chris Demetriou was the signatory for NetBSD,
> Rob Kolstad was the signatory for BSD/OS and I was the signatory
> for FreeBSD.  The agreement was pretty clear on the fact that by
> signing the agreement and putting the mutual
>      lawsuits behind us, Novell agreed that anyone based on 4.4Lite2
> going forward would be free and clear.
>
> And from M. Warner Losh:
>
>      The settlement terms specifically state that SCO cannot sue anybody
> who makes a release based on 4.4-LITE.  The settlement agreement is
> BINDING on both parties.  SCO cannot revoke it, and will have a
> hell of a legal fight if they try.
>
>> They've also made noises about going after *BSD and Apple (they've
>> imported Free & NetBSD code for different subsystems) after this
>> "Linux  business" is through.
>
> Since Apple code is derived from NetBSD and FreeBSD, and since FreeBSD
> and NetBSD are derived from 4.4BSD-Lite, Apple should be in the clear.
>
Phil is correct in the point that SCO can sue whomever they want to, this
is America after all.  Using *BSD is not a cure-all for not getting sued. 
I am probably more aware of this fact than most :(   But the fact that the
OS does have legal standing -- enough to fend off some big money attack --
is more legal warm-fuzzies than most.  The other plus is that *BSD is used
by fewer people and doesn't have lots of corporate cash to go after. (i.e.
IBM although it does now have Apple, in a manner of speaking)  Making it a
less juicy target, at least for now.

With Apple's adoption of the *BSDs and contribution back in to their
development, FreeBSD has really sprung back to life.

The other plus was the philosophy and methodolgy of FreeBSD.  After being
bitten by RHN, I'll gladly redirect that cash towards FreeBSD for a stable
system with longevity.  You can easily choose your updates from just
security only to stable to current.  That is truly refreshing.

Anywho, back to the point, If you are concerned about legal developments
then there is something to be said for the *BSDs.  However, at this point,
I think Big Blue is going to do a number on SCO.  They are not going to
settle they are going to go the distance and in the process -- completely
destroy SCO.  In the long run, this lawsuit could be a very good thing for
linux and OSS.  <disclaimer>IANAL</disclaimer>

-Jeff