zox Posted June 16, 2003 Share Posted June 16, 2003 ArticleExclusive As the worm turnsBy Egan Orion: Sunday 15 June 2003, 17:57SCO, THAT PARIAH of the IT industry, has received what might turn out to be legally damaging return fire from a Linux kernel developer. An email presenting SCO with formal notice alleging copyright infringement was sent to the firm this weekend. The email to SCO is reproduced below.It's perhaps worth noting in passing that over 400 individuals worldwide are credited as authors who have added significant contributions to the Linux kernel, and thousands of others have also contributed kernel code. All of these Linux kernel developers have the right to transmit similar demands to SCO, and possibly pursue lawsuits, as this email suggests.The author of the following email isn't seeking any personal publicity, so information that might identify him has been redacted by request. µSunday, 15 June 2003:Sender information:[snip]Recipient information:To: The SCO Group355 South 520 WestSuite 100Lindon, Utah 84042 USACc: SCO GmbHCountry Manager: Hans BayerNorsk-Data-Strasse 361352 Bad Homburg v.d.HSent via: E-Mail to licensing@sco.com, cc to infod@sco.comNOTICE OF COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT[if your are not the correct recipient for such a notice, please forward this letter to the appropriate recipient, and send me a notice that I can address further mails directly to the appropriate person. Thanks.]Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,I've noticed that the FTP server from your company contains the file linux-2.4.13-21D.src.rpm (md5 checksum: 73cad7e5db287a962de14109fa126354) in the directory /pub/updates/OpenLinux/3.1.1/Workstation/CSSA-2003-020.0/SRPMS/ [1].I'm the co-author and copyright owner of several parts of the source code that is contained in that file[2], among them [snip].According to your press releases [3], the file also contains source code that you consider as your own property and that you did not license under the GPL.I've granted everyone the right to sell, distribute and use my work under the condition that they obey the restriction of the GPL. The GPL requires that a work that is based on a works that is licensed under the GPL must be put under the GPL. I've never authorized any other use of my work.This means that your distribution of the above given file, and any sale of OpenLinux 3.1.1, is not authorized by me and infringes my copyright.I demand that you immediately cease and desist the distribution of the above listed file, and any other work that contains my work.Additionally, I ask you to provide me with a detailed list that shows the amount of unauthorized distribution that happened in the past. As far as I can see, this includes at least any logs from your FTP server for the relevant directories, and a list of the sales of OpenLinux 3.1.1 and any other product that contains my work [4]. I reserve the right to sue you for damages and any profits you made by selling my work. Note that my work is not of U.S. origin, thus the lack of a formal registration at the USPTO does not bar me from filing an infringement suit. I also reserve the right to sue your subsidiary in Germany or any other subsidiary.As an alternative, I'll abstain from suing you for copyright infringement if you drop your claims that the source in linux-2.4.13-21D.src.rpm infringes your copyright, for example by putting the part that you claim copyright on under the GPL. The exact details would have to be discussed [5].Best regards,[snip][1] i.e. the URL to the file is ftp://ftp.sco.com/pub/updates/OpenLinux/3....13-21D.src.rpm I've verified the existance of the file on Sat Jun 14 08:44:15 UTC 2003.[2] Note that I'm not claiming to be the sole copyright owner, I did a significant improvement and partial rewrite of source code written by others.[3] Among others, the press release titled "SCO Suspends Distribution of Linux Pending Intellectual Property Clarification; Announces Greater Focus on UNIX and SCOx Strategy".[4] Virtually all of my contributions to the linux kernel are tagged with either my name ([snip]) or the email address [snip]. Thus you can easily identify the affected products with a global search on the uncompressed sources for these names.[5] I'm only speaking for myself, I do not know what the other copyright owners will do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cluttermagnet Posted June 16, 2003 Share Posted June 16, 2003 ArticleExclusive As the worm turnsBy Egan Orion: Sunday 15 June 2003, 17:57SCO, THAT PARIAH of the IT industry, has received what might turn out to be legally damaging return fire from a Linux kernel developer. An email presenting SCO with formal notice alleging copyright infringement was sent to the firm this weekend. The email to SCO is reproduced below. This SCO/Linux thing is obviously going to provide us with endless hours of amusement- and consternation. Good article, zox. This falls pretty much under the old adage "Live by the sword, die by the sword." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LilBambi Posted June 16, 2003 Share Posted June 16, 2003 Here's a few more pieces to this one:SCO might recycle AT&T's Unix blunderDid SCO Violate the GPL? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zox Posted June 16, 2003 Author Share Posted June 16, 2003 Well the story will start to unravel now I think.100 days that SCO gave to IBM to comply is up so the most interesting part is yet to come.Does anyone thinks IBM will fork out money and actualy buy SCO.I know it is just one of the options but they are starting to bite now and they are backed with Microsoft money so they can drag anything and anyone into lawsuits as they will :(One thing that puzzles me is that there is still not much response from IBM.Does it mean they still have not worked out strategy or they are just waiting for special moment??Anyway, I hope certain distros don't license anything or make any deals with them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
havnblast Posted June 16, 2003 Share Posted June 16, 2003 I just read that article when I got to work and it's a taste of their own medicine you got to love that. Boy did I chuckle and snicker when I read that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nlinecomputers Posted June 16, 2003 Share Posted June 16, 2003 D*** fool should have used a lawyer. You NEVER give an "out" in a threat C&D letter. As an alternative, I'll abstain from suing you for copyright infringement if you drop your claims that the source in linux-2.4.13-21D.src.rpm infringes your copyright, for example by putting the part that you claim copyright on under the GPL. The exact details would have to be discussed [5].With that line in the letter they are much less likely to take him seriously. Also had he used a lawyer it would have shown SCO that this guy was seriously considering a lawsuit. And he really may be but he has made a serious blunder in my opinion. I doubt SCO will even blink. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zox Posted June 16, 2003 Author Share Posted June 16, 2003 Maybe his intention was not to sue them in the first place but just to stir it up a bit and show to public that everybody can say anything and sue anybody :)I wish this guy is serious and that he's got some ground for such a thing.I also hope he's got backing of lawyer for this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.