Recent SCO/Linux News

From: Avi Dines <amendoza@schwartz-pr.com>
Subject: SCO Media Statement Re IBM Counterclaim 08.07.03
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2003 19:52:30 GMT

SCO Media Statement Re IBM Counterclaim 08.07.03

We view IBMs counterclaim filing today as an effort to distract attention
from its flawed Linux business model. It repeats the same unsubstantiated
allegations made in Red Hats filing earlier this week. If IBM were serious
about addressing the real problems with Linux, it would offer full customer
indemnification and move away from the GPL license.

As the stakes continue to rise in the Linux battles, it becomes
increasingly clear that the core issue is bigger than SCO, Red Hat, or even
IBM. The core issue is about the value of intellectual property in an
Internet age. In a strange alliance, IBM and the Free Software Foundation
have lined up on the same side of this argument in support of the GPL. IBM
urges its customers to use non-warranted, unprotected software. This
software violates SCOs intellectual property rights in UNIX, and fails to
give comfort to customers going forward in use of Linux. If IBM wants
customers to accept the risks of the GPL, it should indemnify them against
that risk. The continuing refusal to provide customer indemnification is
the truest measure of IBM's belief in its recently filed claims.


Regarding the patent accusations -- SCO has shipped these products for many
years, in some cases for nearly two decades, and this is the first time
that IBM has ever raised an issue about patent infringement in these
products. Furthermore, these claims were not raised in IBMs original
answer.

SCO reiterates its position that it intends to defend its intellectual
property rights. SCO will remain on course to require customers to license
infringing Linux implementations as a condition of further use. This is the
best and clearest course for customers to minimize Linux problems.

Index

Jump to Comments

Many of the products and books I review are things I purchased for my own use. Some were given to me specifically for the purpose of reviewing them. I resell or can earn commissions from the sale of some of these items. Links within these pages may be affiliate links that pay me for referring you to them. That's mostly insignificant amounts of money; whenever it is not I have made my relationship plain. I also may own stock in companies mentioned here. If you have any question, please do feel free to contact me.

Specific links that take you to pages that allow you to purchase the item I reviewed are very likely to pay me a commission. Many of the books I review were given to me by the publishers specifically for the purpose of writing a review. These gifts and referral fees do not affect my opinions; I often give bad reviews anyway.

We use Google third-party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit our website. These companies may use information (not including your name, address, email address, or telephone number) about your visits to this and other websites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you. If you would like more information about this practice and to know your choices about not having this information used by these companies, click here.