From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 10 16:33:13 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F1C237B401 for ; Thu, 10 Jul 2003 16:33:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.71]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8292743FA3 for ; Thu, 10 Jul 2003 16:33:12 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mjeays2551@rogers.com) Received: from rogers.com ([24.101.253.54]) by fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.comESMTP <20030710233303.QOUV427382.fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@rogers.com>; Thu, 10 Jul 2003 19:33:03 -0400 Message-ID: <3F0DF7B6.1060300@rogers.com> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 19:33:10 -0400 From: mjeays2551 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20021005 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bill Moran References: <20030709125055.GA90046@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <20030709193315.A494@citusc.usc.edu> <20030710123509.GA97000@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <3F0D6AAD.9030406@potentialtech.com> <20030710141516.GA97366@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <3F0DAFDA.2050708@potentialtech.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH PLAIN at fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [24.101.253.54] using ID at Thu, 10 Jul 2003 19:33:02 -0400 cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Where can I find FreeBSD-related SCO lawsuit updates? X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 23:33:13 -0000 Bill Moran wrote: > > I firmly believe, also, that the Linux folks should take a hint from the > successful actions of UC Berkely and counter-sue that SCO has stolen > GPLed > Linux technology for thier softwares. Demand that a non-biased third > party > be given leave to review SCO's source code to prove that there's no GPLed > code in it. I think that would put SCO in a tight position, just like it > worked for the BSD's years ago. > That's a brilliant idea, that I haven't seen so far in all the articles I have read on this wretched subject. I hope someone takes it up. My belief is that SCO has stamped firmly on the dragon's tail, and is waiting around to see what it will do. To stretch the analogy further (maybe too far), upping the claim to $3 billion was like giving the dragon a further kick, about where the tail joins the body. We are all waiting for the response with anticipation and delight. Mike Jeays