[TUHS] SCO sues IBM?

[David C. Jenner]

Warren has a signed, dated, and numbered license for Ancient Unix (AU-0).
I have a signed, dated, and numbered license for Ancient Unix (AU-1).
I don't see how Warren can't distribute to me any software covered under the license.

Peter Jeremy wrote:
> 
> On 2003-Mar-10 14:21:00 -0600, Jeffrey Sharp <jss at subatomix.com> wrote:
> >On Sunday, March 9, 2003, Michael Davidson wrote:
> >> I will, however, ask for an "official" statement of SCO's current position
> >> on "Ancient UNIX"
> >
> >But once they've released it under a BSD-style license, it is released. They
> >simply can't unrelease it. They don't have to continue distributing it, but
> >they can't stop me from doing what the license explicitly allows. So their
> >current position WRT ancient UNIX may not mave much legal weight. IANAL,
> >TINLA.
> 
> AFAIK, the only evidence we have that it is released under a BSD-style
> license is an e-mail allegedly from an authorised person within SCO.
> Warren has not been able to find an equivalent statement on their
> website.  I suspect Warren is concerned that they could claim it was
> never released - ie the e-mail is a faked/forged or the sender didn't
> have the authority to make the claims therein.
> 
> What would you do if SCO's lawyers came knocking on your door and
> demanded you cease distributing ancient UNIX or derived products?
> Whilst you could probably prove the authenticity of the e-mail, this
> would cost real money - and SCO probably can afford to spend a lot
> more money than you can.
> 
> The date of the e-mail may also be a crucial issue - since IBM would
> presumably have the right to use the code after SCO changed the code
> to a BSD license.
> 
> IANAL, TINLA etc.
> 
> Peter
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs

-- 
David C. Jenner
djenner at earthlink.net