[linux-elitists] More info - actual source of SCO code -

[Jeff Kinz]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I'm reposting this from the SUSE email list

> Received: from lists.suse.com (lists.suse.com [217.9.113.69])
> 	by redline.kinz.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id h589Zsf04979
> 	for <jkinz at kinz.org>; Sun, 8 Jun 2003 05:35:56 -0400
> list-post: <mailto:suse-linux-e at suse.com>
> X-Message-Number-for-archive: 148844
> From: Curtis Rey <crrey at charter.net>
> Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 04:36:51 -0700
>
> On Sunday 08 June 2003 03:14, James Mohr wrote:
> > This is just too good to be true:
> >
> > jimmo at saturn:/usr/src/linux> grep sco.com ./arch/i386/kernel/microcode.c
> >  *      1.0     16 Feb 2000, Tigran Aivazian <tigran at sco.com>
> >  *      1.01    18 Feb 2000, Tigran Aivazian <tigran at sco.com>
> >  *      1.02    21 Feb 2000, Tigran Aivazian <tigran at sco.com>
> >  *      1.03    29 Feb 2000, Tigran Aivazian <tigran at sco.com>
> >
> > Note the dates. This is "new" SCO. Intestingly enough, these are early
> > 2000 and by  03 Aug 2000, he was listed as  "Tigran Aivazian
> > <tigran at veritas.com>". You might not think that it makes a difference.
> > However, once at Veritas, he contributed code to ./fs/bfs/inode.c,
> > ./fs/proc/kcore.c and ./net/socket.c. While at SCO he was in the
> > "Escalations Research Group" for SCO UK.
> >
> > Also check out the "Linux Kernel 2.4 Internals". It's the *same* guy. (
> > Christoph Hellwig of  caldera.de also contributed to this docment).
> > So here we have a kernel expert who contributes code to the Linux kernel
> > while still at SCO (things like "Tigran Aivazian :  fixed "0.00 in
> > /proc/uptime on SMP" bug."). He contributes a great deal to the Linux
> > kernel. He posts to all sorts of kernel and other mailing lists (google
> > his name).
> >
> > Now you are going to say that the **only** place the UNIX code could have
> > possible come from is IBM. Hmmmm. Hmmmmm. Okay, the gun is not smoking,
> > but in my opinion it is pretty warm.
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > jimmo
>
> Now the trick to it all.  Once you find the associations with SCO
> devs/personel that did contribs to anything coded in Linux, kernel and all.
> Then you take what you have found and see what else these individual did
> for SCO, BSD, Unix, Novell, etc, etc, etc..
>
> The point being is this.  Say the one of these guys not only contribute to
> the Linux kernel, but also do work on SCO's Unix wares.  This is especially
> telling if any of the code done in both Unix and Linux dealt with the same
> or similar stuff... Say, fs/inode work that is in both nix and the penguin.
> Then it could be reasonably argued that this individual had working
> knowledge of what worked in both and then the diferentiations would be a
> matter of fineties and difficult to argue in terms of exclusion based on
> licenses, contract, and "rights to access and use".
>
> It would be safe to say that he would also have discussed other matters
> with the other devs (read non-SCO) and then given ideas or direction
> related to his knowledge of coding for Unix to solve a problem for/with
> another dev in Linux.  This gets fairly convoluted and the clear definition
> of IP infringement slips further into obscurity because the SCO dev freely
> gave information and code to Linux.
>
> Once again, the contention of McBride is that IBM gave Unix code to Linux
> developers, or IBM devs donated code during certain key moments in the
> development cycle.  McBrides wants to insist that this was done on the sly
> or without proper permission.  But, If said code was intrinsically common
> knowledge to devs outside of IBM because a SCO dev mentions code methods,
> theory, or actual documentations then McBride is essentially screwed.
>
> Once again.  The key to keeping intellectual property is to restrict the
> use, access, and even knowledge about it.  If SCO didn't see fit to inform
> their devs what was in and out of bounds, or better yet, didn't secure
> documents, archives, tar files, etc, etc.... In otherwords Lock down the
> code.  Then it's highly questionable that someone used in an improper way. 
> You can't have it both ways,  You can't argue that people are "stealing"
> you code when your own developers are blabbing about or handing it out.
>
> Note.  M$ doesn't give anyone "access" to source without very stringent
> guidelines and restrictions.  It is never put into a 3rd party ware unless
> it's M$ approved and bought, paid, and signed for.  Just think,  If an M$
> dev was helping devolpers for a 2nd or 3rd party.  What do you think would
> be written into it?  Not a weak statement about all rights reserved tied
> into the GPL.  It would be bound by a NDA, EULA, License, Term of Use, etc.
>  And let's not even think about an M$ dev contributing to a 3rd party
> competing products (which is what SCO has now Labelled Linux). without the
> permission of M$.  The M$ dev would be out of a job, deep in debt to both
> the lawers and M$  - because M$ would fire, sue, and blacklist him.
>
> SCO not only actively contributed the developers and code,  But made no
> efforts to restrict the use of it AFAICT- Not until they were about to go
> belly up and decided to milk IBM for a buyout/tort settlement.
>
> It's beyond fishy and borders on outright fraudulent.  I think the Linux
> community should start a massive campaign to see what of SCO's is in Linux
> and then find out how similar it is to Unix and I bet the common bond will
> be the developers or fairly unrestricted access to Unix code and knowledge
> via the SCO devs.  It's especially damning if SCO devs posted Unix code
> straight to the kernel CVS repos, or listed in a changelog as fix with
> reference to said code that matched Unix code.   This would be useful to
> say the least.
>
> Like I said, U.S. Law states that once the owner lets the cat out of the
> back, ownership is essentially a non-issue and it becomes common knowledge.
> Intellectual property equates to a substantial amount of secrecy and
> protective efforts.  Fail there and it becomes all but an outright
> non-issue.
>
> Cheers, Curtis.

- --
Jeff Kinz, Open-PC, Emergent Research,  Hudson, MA.  jkinz at kinz.org
copyright 2003.  Use is restricted. Any use is an
acceptance of the offer at http://www.kinz.org/policy.html.
Don't forget to change your password often.
_______________________________________________
linux-elitists
http://zgp.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-elitists
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+5KGm2MO5UukaubkRAoyOAJ96naD+FCHhqpzdPBt0lUqV7PSplwCbBG7R
ZFT1JqXvOBFO74R+MkfWcsw=
=6HlE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----