On Dec 13, 2003, at 2:59 PM, Lee Einer wrote:

>
>
>
>
> Carl Parrish wrote:
>
>> Unlike SCO this *actually* could hurt us. 
>> http://www.linuxworld.com/story/38208.htm
>>
>
> Key words-
>
>> / It's a hypothetical risk, but it's there."/
>
> The argument as put forth by MicroSoft's counsel is basically that-
>
> If someone who is contributing to an open source project is also 
> employed with a company writing proprietary software, and if that 
> someone is both bright enough to write code and dumb enough to 
> incorporate code which they know full well to be proprietary  into the 
> open source project, and if that someone actually does so, and if it 
> is found out, there could be a legal conflict.
>
> I don't understand why this would be news- it is basically a summary 
> of SCO's case, cast in extremely hypothetical terms. What am I 
> missing?

Hmm...

SCO has made several arguments, different ones in the press and in 
their filings, but I don't recall that they ever asserted that their 
own employees put code in Linux without permission.