First Analyst Impressed By SCO's 'Proof'

On Sat, 2003-06-07 at 00:45, Alan Dayley wrote:

> I don't understand a key in all of this.
>
> Basis:
> 1. Assume for a moment that SCO's claims are true and Unix code that
> they own is in Linux.
> 2. Assume that I am CIO of a Fortune 1500 company using Linux in my IT
> infrastructure.
>
> Question:
> Can SCO simply give me an ultimatum, requiring me to pay them or forcing
> me to stop using Linux? They obviously wouldn't own all of Linux so
> wouldn't they only be able to make me stop using the offending code?
> After the offending code is written out, I could go on using Linux again.

The problem is, you've been using their code for x amount of time. They
can sue you for whatever they feel like for using their code without
paying/authorization. What they will collect is a whole other ballgame,
but lawsuits are expensive no matter what.

> That would be a worse case scenerio that I don't think will come to be.
> However, I do worry that SCO can maintain a cloud over Linux and really
> hurt people who have built their business on it.

Well, I have used this lawsuit to convince one of my customers that the
old SCO box they were thinking of upgrading should instead be replaced.
With Linux.

> On the other hand, once the mess is resolved, SCO will either slink away
> in defeat or crumble away once the code is removed, since they
> completely angered most of their potential market. Then, I would expect
> Linux growth to explode because of the pent-up demand.

I hope you're right, but the truth is that Main Street, USA is not even
aware of this lawsuit. I don't think it will significantly affect
demand for Linux one way or another.

Thomas