[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Fsfe-uk] BBC Article about Linux SCO and Copyrights - BBC calls for
Re: [Fsfe-uk] BBC Article about Linux SCO and Copyrights - BBC calls for statements (fwd)
Sat, 30 Aug 2003 03:22:18 +0100
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624
Ramanan Selvaratnam wrote:
MJ Ray wrote:
From address@hidden, a pointer to
Miles away from the single mention of IBM ...
'SCO are claiming that some programmers took code which SCO owned and
released it illegally under the GPL.'
How convenient not to mention that in the '30 million lines of code'
there are direct contributions by SCO developers under the GPL?
What about IBM's countersuit against SCO for GPL violation?
Ah! Just saw this! I was not aware that IBM struck back with WMD (the
article is not clear enought on this)
'First, filing a patent application (in the US) can take anywhere
between $15,000 and $25,000, which isn't within reach of many small
businesses. Second, costs associated with defending against patent
assaults dwarf the aforementioned application fees, making patents an
A clear contemporary revelation of the dangers of a software patent regime?
SCO's claims and badly written articles apart does anyone get the
feeling that this dispute prooves that copyright law is sufficient to
protect software unlike what Arlene McArthy's report claims?
OK I rewrite this ... copyright law is sufficient; software patents are
not too little or too much just plain bad, bad, bad!
No to software patents!
(BTW, does anyone know more about the subject covered by US patent
number 5,805,785 ?...serious)
Re: [Fsfe-uk] BBC Article about Linux SCO and Copyrights - BBC calls for statements (fwd), Ramanan Selvaratnam, 2003/08/29
- Re: [Fsfe-uk] BBC Article about Linux SCO and Copyrights - BBC calls for statements (fwd),
Ramanan Selvaratnam <=