Board index » kylix » Re: We are all going to have to license unixware to use linux

Re: We are all going to have to license unixware to use linux


2003-07-25 07:00:29 AM
kylix0
Quote
>...usual american {*word*99} of threats...

You don't have lawyers, solicitors, etc., in other parts of the world? Somehow, I doubt that. But it would be more accurate to attribute the practice to lawyers, than to claim it as an American practice.
American Lawyers? British practice is somewhat more restrained.
--
Lester Caine
-----------------------------
L.S.Caine Electronic Services
 
 

Re:Re: We are all going to have to license unixware to use linux

Quote
American Lawyers? British practice is somewhat more restrained.
AND we are innocent until proven guilty IN a court :)
--
Lester Caine
-----------------------------
L.S.Caine Electronic Services
 

Re:Re: We are all going to have to license unixware to use linux

"ckd" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
It was a poor example.
It was not a poor exemple at all. It was all I needed to make my point about
law and punishment.
SCO, Linux and {*word*99}lications are totally irrelevant to what I was saying.
 

{smallsort}

Re:Re: We are all going to have to license unixware to use linux

"ckd" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
I think now you're just being stubborn because the distinction is not
that difficult to grasp.
No. You're just missing the point we were making. That's all ;-)
 

Re:Re: We are all going to have to license unixware to use linux

"juliusz" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
There was no crime committed.. therefore there is no need for
punishment.
SO %^&&^#&^ WHAT???
THAT DOESN'T CHANGE A THING.
I didn't imply Linus did any crime. I cannot care less.
ORIGINAL STATEMENT:
If they show what places of code is
"stolen" opensource community will quickly rewrite these places and there
is no possibility to demand any money from anyone.
MY ANSWER (translated in simpler terms):
In the event a jury would find them guilty, it wouldn't matter what they
would do afterwords.
They would still get punished like (for instance) a thief steling, somebody
speeding or so on.
Doing some good after you do some bad doesn't eliminate the legal
consequence, which is punishment.
That is why, if I am caught by a cop going 75 in a 50, I won't avoid a
ticket even if I tell him that from tomorrow on I will use the train or go
only 40. IT WOULD NOT MATTER.
The fact they will or won't be found guilty is a different matter.
Do I believe they are guilty? I don't know, I don't care and have no
position on the matter.
I do believe that it's very probable they took some small chunks of code
from here and there, but I wouldn't make the big deal SCO is making out of
it.
 

Re:Re: We are all going to have to license unixware to use linux

On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 19:36:02 -0500, "Alessandro Federici - RemObjects
Software" <alef@[nospam]remobjects.com>wrote:
Quote

It was not a poor exemple at all. It was all I needed to make my point about
law and punishment.
SCO, Linux and {*word*99}lications are totally irrelevant to what I was saying.

????
I think you need to reread your comments to Enders post that I
initially replied to. Ender's post was about SCO and linux, to which
you replied, "ROTFL You're joking, right?" If you're going to switch
gears like that (assuming your comments were irrelevant to SCO and
linux) you need to post a warning first ;-)
 

Re:Re: We are all going to have to license unixware to use linux

"ckd" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
I think you need to reread your comments to Enders post that I
initially replied to. Ender's post was about SCO and linux, to which
you replied, "ROTFL You're joking, right?" If you're going to switch
gears like that (assuming your comments were irrelevant to SCO and
linux) you need to post a warning first ;-)
No, you need to see what I quoted.
The statement I quoted made no legal sense regardless of what somebody else
said before.
I don't need to see what Enders said.
 

Re:Re: We are all going to have to license unixware to use linux

In article < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >, XXXX@XXXXX.COM says...
Quote
"Eduardo A. Salgado" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >writes:
>What if SCO had that code in question added to Linux by one of their
>minions just so they could do what they are doing now?
Not as far-fetched as you may think...
radio.weblogs.com/0120124/2003/07/18.html
The GrokLaw site is a pretty snazzy one; found it through one /. poster,
with a little bit more insight than the typical run-of-the-mill.
I especially appreciated the light he shed on IBM's response, which most
people interpreted as not sticking up for anything, when indeed that
doesn't seem to be the case:
radio.weblogs.com/0120124/2003/07/15.html
-- Ritchie Annand
Senior Software Architect
Malibu Software & Engineering Ltd.
Business: www.malibugroup.com
Personal: nimble.nimblebrain.net
Wiki: wiki.nimblebrain.net
 

Re:Re: We are all going to have to license unixware to use linux

In article <3f203dd8$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM >,
johnjac76[nospam]@comcast.net says...
Quote
In borland.public.kylix.non-technical, XXXX@XXXXX.COM wrote in
message < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >...
>Despite what the RIAA spews, copyright violation is NOT theft.

It is very much a type of theft. It involves using somebody else's property
without their permission. Period. End of discussion. You lose.
The legal term is 'misappropriation', and differs from theft (aka
larceny) in that you aren't *denying* the other party the *use* of their
property (as you would be if you made off with their car, for example).
That doesn't make it legal, of course, but different. With
misappropriation, you're making someone else incur costs, devalue their
service or products, but doing so through improper means. It's the
'improper means' that has legal definition and needs to be proven. Theft
is downright unambiguous apart from cases of unclear ownership.
There's been a move afoot to criminalize misappropriation more and more
(not just in North America, but worldwide), especially with respect to
trade secret misappropriation and copyright violations (witness
RIAA/MPAA).
I had to run off and educate myself a while ago. My internet provider,
Shaw Cable, has been running ads where they catch a kid stealing a
chocolate bar, or show a man saying 'this man is about to steal
something... no, it's not a handbag...'.
Oh, but they're stealing satellite signals.
"Theft is theft" is their by-line, and it pisses me off to no end the
simplistic equation they throw at the audience.
(I could understand it if they were a satellite provider themselves...
but AFAICT, they *aren't* - but rather seem to be trying to threaten the
gray-market satellite users up here)
-- Ritchie Annand
Senior Software Architect
Malibu Software & Engineering Ltd.
Business: www.malibugroup.com
Personal: nimble.nimblebrain.net
Wiki: wiki.nimblebrain.net
 

Re:Re: We are all going to have to license unixware to use linux

"juliusz" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
>SO %^&&^#&^ WHAT???
>THAT DOESN'T CHANGE A THING.
That's because you are off-topic.. ;-)
Incorrect <G>
"That doesn't change a thing" because it doesn't logically depend on any
other topic BUT the one quoted.
 

Re:Re: We are all going to have to license unixware to use linux

Alessandro Federici - RemObjects Software wrote:
Quote
"That doesn't change a thing" because it doesn't logically depend on any
other topic BUT the one quoted.

This what your said:
"It was not a poor example at all. It was all I needed to make my
point about law and punishment. SCO, Linux and {*word*99}lications are
totally irrelevant to what I was saying."
We all know how crime and punishment correlates.. and any
discussion about this here is off-topic specially as you indicated
that SCO and Linux are totally irrelevant to what you are saying..
It would be interesting however to see what kind of punishment SCO
corporate officers can get for spreading FUD against Linux, what by
itself is not a crime, at least in a legal sense, but because of
inflating SCO stock, therefore potentially defrauding many unaware
investors that took SCO wards at face value. It would be interesting
to see how many people purchase a large quantities of SCO stack just
before SCO announce that they are suing IBM for 1B.. Insider trading
is a serious crime... if all that happened, that is..
--
InstallMade - Kylix-specific installer/builder
www.superobject.com/installmade/
Packages: tar.gz, self-installable, RPM, LCR,
and creates standalone executables.
 

Re:Re: We are all going to have to license unixware to use linux

Alessandro Federici - RemObjects Software wrote:
Quote
"Ender" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
news: XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...

>IMHO, situation with SCO and Linux may be illustrated by following.

But you do understand it's irrelevant to how laws work, right? ;-)

I am sure that he is perfectly capable of grasping the concept ...
we all do.. ;-)
If you want to talk about law and punishment concepts .. for that,
the bast place would be the off-topic group ..
--
InstallMade - Kylix-specific installer/builder
www.superobject.com/installmade/
Packages: tar.gz, self-installable, RPM, LCR,
and creates standalone executables.
 

Re:Re: We are all going to have to license unixware to use linux

Alessandro Federici - RemObjects Software wrote:
Quote
That is why, if I am caught by a cop going 75 in a 50, I won't avoid a
ticket even if I tell him that from tomorrow on I will use the train or go
only 40. IT WOULD NOT MATTER.
IMHO, situation with SCO and Linux may be illustrated by following.
Cops declares in their internal documents that speed on the road has
restricted to 40, but does not place any road signs on the road or place
signs that nobody see it. After that someone move with speed 50 cops jumped
from the ambush and say: "Hey guy. There are sign borrowed under dirt and
you caught in high speed".
 

Re:Re: We are all going to have to license unixware to use linux

Hi,
I think this tread is pretty off-topic, but I want to share my
thoughts about this with you all. I've much objections against
SCO:
1) They supported Linux for a long period and now they are
dumping it and leaving their own customers in the dark.
2) Unix is owned by AT&T and it is an open platform.
3) They are far (too) late, since this issue is running for a
couple of years.
4) There are a lot of companies and private users working with
Linux.
5) SCO looks like to follow MS in order to be a Unix monopolist
and that's not good for honest competition.
I also think that monopolism is **very bad** for capitalism. My
thought about capitalism is freedom and monopolism is destroying
that freedom so it more resembles communism, since one entity
is the boss of everything. Capitalism means a healthy compet-
ition in order that products are sold by niches of users. That
means that customers can make a choice between a couple of
good products. With monopolism customers have no choice: they
buy one products without warrantee that the sole product is
good, since the sole company feels like God and can do anything
with it.
By the way: since Kylix is a superb Linux application develop-
ment tool, I find that SCO must keep their hands off from
Linux. I also find that SCO is **obliged** to show the offending
lines in Linux so that the Linux Kernel group can modify the
kernel so that both parties get happy!
With regards from,
Tom
 

Re:Re: We are all going to have to license unixware to use linux

In borland.public.kylix.non-technical, XXXX@XXXXX.COM wrote in
message < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >...
Quote
I think now you're just being stubborn because the distinction is not
that difficult to grasp.
No, you keep missing my point, namely that you are arguing semantics at this
point. Violating copyrights is wrongful and should be punished. I
really don't care what you or lawyers call the crime.
--
***Posted by Jake's Custom Newsgroup Reader***
Posted using Jake's Super Newsreader 0.9.2.953