Kenneth Stailey: Two words: "version control". If the code that SCO purports is copied into Linux is known the version control archives will say who inserted it. It will be very easy to prove if Caldera inserted the code themselves. Alas, two more words: "read-write storage." Version control info is stored in a file; how do we know (as SCalderaO might argue) that some hacker hasn't edited it after the fact to pretend something was put in by Caldera, or that they just lied about it to begin with? Version control data might be a useful, but I suspect only as a trail to specific people whose could then offer personal testimony about the history of a particular piece of code. The testimony would be harder to impeach than the code. Even a read-only copy of the version control info, e.g. a CD-ROM, isn't a lot more solid; some hard evidence would be needed of when that CD-ROM was written, beyond the easily-forged timestamps on the disc itself, and there could still be a claim that someone just lied when writing it, especially if there is a claim that malice was involved. So it still would probably come down to personal testimony. The usual disclaimer applies: I'm no lawyer. I'm just trying to think of counter-arguments, both those reasonable in abstract and those that seem to fit within the spirit of the complaint against IBM. Norman Wilson Toronto ON