Board index » delphi » WTF?

WTF?


2005-08-11 03:55:01 AM
delphi205
(www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1846635,00.asp)
What to make of:
- To buttress its anti-Linux product strategy, The SCO Group Inc. is working
with third-party partners that include MySQL AB and EnterpriseDB Corp. on
databases, Borland Software Corp. on tools, .......
and
- Meanwhile, SCO is talking with Borland about the prospect of building new
development tools for SCO environments, according to Hughes.
just very curious,
Martin
 
 

Re:WTF?

Martin,
I think the rest of the site is far more telling. How many lawsuits
to they have going? After all these years, no one actually knows
who has copyrights on software that they have been selling for
over a decade?
I think Borland should avoid them all like the plague. No need
to get involved in the legal battles of others.
Thanks,
Brett
 

Re:WTF?

"Martin Brekhof" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>wrote in news:42fa5ba0$1
@newsgroups.borland.com:
Quote
(www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1846635,00.asp)
boo SCO.
www.groklaw.net/article.php
--
Iman
 

Re:WTF?

"Iman L Crawford" <ilcrawford.at.hotmail.dot.com>writes
Quote
boo SCO.

www.groklaw.net/article.php
Would you care to summarize that web page for those of us with too limited
time to read through it?
 

Re:WTF?

Captain Jake writes:
Quote
>www.groklaw.net/article.php

Would you care to summarize that web page for those of us with too
limited time to read through it?
SCO actually "borrowed" Linux code that shipped in their products.
This doesn't necessarily answer the original post but just shows what kind
of a company SCO is...
--
Ben
 

Re:WTF?

"Ben Hochstrasser" <bhoc@tiscali123^H^H^H.ch>writes
Quote
SCO actually "borrowed" Linux code that shipped in their products.
How do you borrow something that is free and is placed in the public domain
by its authors?
 

Re:WTF?

Captain Jake writes:
Quote
>SCO actually "borrowed" Linux code that shipped in their products.

How do you borrow something that is free and is placed in the public
domain by its authors?
Linux code is *not* public domain.
--
Ben
 

Re:WTF?

Hi,
GPL <>Public Domain
If you distribute an application that uses GPL'd code, you must also provide
the code. it is ilegal to use GPL'd code in a closed software. If it is PD,
it's ok to distribute only the binaries.
Regards,
Marco
 

Re:WTF?

Does anybody out there still buys SCO products? Today they're a little more
than a litigation company, AFAIK.
I've never talked about how borland should do their business in these NGs,
but, this time, I must say that just talking with this company is already a
big mistake and a terrible PR. Even more for a company that still sells
Linux products.
Oracle is right avoinding them.
Regards,
Marco
"Martin Brekhof" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes news:42fa5ba0
 

Re:WTF?

"Captain Jake" <jake[nospam]@jsnewsreader.com>wrote in
Quote
How do you borrow something that is free and is placed in the public
domain by its authors?
Good thing you're not part of the trial. SCO tried to argue GPL = public
domain, but failed.
--
Iman
 

Re:WTF?

"Captain Jake" <jake[nospam]@jsnewsreader.com>wrote in
Quote
Would you care to summarize that web page for those of us with too
limited time to read through it?
Just an indication of the type of company Borland will be dealing with.
They sued IBM for copyright infringement, all the while they were really
the ones doing the infringing.
--
Iman
 

Re:WTF?

Quote
Would you care to summarize that web page for those of us with too limited
time to read through it?
As I understand it the SCO Group at one time either included some Linux
source (most notably from the kernel) in theire own products but didn't
supply the source for the resulting product and/or distributed one or more
GPL protected binaries/applications. The first one would mean that they
violated copyrights, the second one is legally correct.
Either way it is some kind of strange as they are fighting several juridical
battles (with IBM, Novell, Red Hat etc.) about Linux including copyrighted
material from SCO etc.
What made me post the original message is:
- SCO is facing some very, very uncertain times (legally, financially). Why
would Borland partner with them?
- Borland has no Linux/Unix products that are actively supported that I know
of (Interbase maybe?), so what tools would they make available for a Unix
derivate? Kylix, JBuilder? Why?
- MySQL and EnterpriseDB (a Postgresql variant) joining a anti-linux
campaign strikes me as very unlikely.
So that left me with the question what to think about the article.
regards,
Martin
 

Re:WTF?

"Martin Brekhof" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
Either way it is some kind of strange as they are fighting several
juridical
battles (with IBM, Novell, Red Hat etc.) about Linux including copyrighted
material from SCO etc.
I haven't followed SCO since 1999, but it seems that there may be some
confusion about "SCO" (pre-Caldera purchase) and "SCO Group" (post-Caldera
purchase). "SCO" (original) sued IBM et all for using their code. This would
be code written before Caldera ever entered the picture. Now "SCO Group" is
being sued for using (or mis-using) Linux code. This would be code "SCO
Group" (or Caldera) wrote/included/stole after purchasing "SCO".
I may be wrong. Wouldn't be the first time.
 

Re:WTF?

Captain Jake writes:
Quote
How do you borrow something that is free and is placed in the public domain
by its authors?

That may be true for BSD. But not Linux.
 

Re:WTF?

Martin Brekhof writes:
Quote
- Meanwhile, SCO is talking with Borland about the prospect of building
new development tools for SCO environments, according to Hughes.
If they take SCO's cash to fix Kylix, and presumably get Kylix to run
wherever OpenServer runs, I would be happy. Assuming they can take whatever
results come about and make a Kylix that works for x86 Linux too.
Course, it could all be more JBuilder news.
-Brion