From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jul 11 05:55:15 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 53A5F37B401 for ; Fri, 11 Jul 2003 05:55:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mta4.adelphia.net (mta4.adelphia.net [64.8.50.184]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 872B443F75 for ; Fri, 11 Jul 2003 05:55:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wmoran@potentialtech.com) Received: from potentialtech.com ([24.53.179.151]) by mta4.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.32 201-253-122-126-132-20030307) with ESMTP id <20030711125514.CNDD1347.mta4.adelphia.net@potentialtech.com> for ; Fri, 11 Jul 2003 08:55:14 -0400 Message-ID: <3F0EB3B1.30102@potentialtech.com> Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 08:55:13 -0400 From: Bill Moran User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030429 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org 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> <3F0E7B5D.30102@mail.ptd.net> In-Reply-To: <3F0E7B5D.30102@mail.ptd.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 12:55:15 -0000 T.M. Sommers wrote: > Bill Moran wrote: > > > >> I think that if SCO _wins_ the lawsuit, it will help the free software >> cause, >> since the Linux project will be required to remove a few bits of code to >> satisfy SCO's demands (thus proving that a free software project can >> easily >> survive lawsuits such as this). That will be the end of it. Remember >> that >> US law is based on precedents, and BSD has a precident set already. > > The outcome of the BSD case was a settlement, which is not precedent at > all. The opinion on the various motions can be precedent, but as it > came from a trial court, it is not binding on anyone, including other > trial courts. Hmmm ... good point. For some reason I hadn't seen that perfectly obvious point. -- Bill Moran Potential Technologies http://www.potentialtech.com