Although the Lindon, Utah-based Unix operating system vendor is sticking by its claims that Linux contains code that has been illegally copied from its Unix System V, it appears the company is unlikely to follow up its $3bn lawsuit against IBM Corp with similar actions against Red Hat Inc, SuSE Linux AG or others.
One of the reasons we haven’t launched a suit against a Linux distributor is because of the GPL [open source General Public License], Sontag told ComputerWire. It would blow up the GPL and destroy Linux and we do not want to do that.
Rather than focus its legal efforts on the open source community and Linux distributors, SCO is working to identify the issues and come up with solutions in consultation with customers and other parties, said Sontag. The company hopes to have these solutions finalized during July, he added.
One solution may be a new kind of licensing mechanism for the SCO Unix code, he said, although there remain issues with the GPL that complicate how such a mechanism might be implemented. Sontag said SCO’s effort was focused on identifying Linux intellectual property issues and possible mechanisms through which future problems could be prevented.
The reason why there is such a big problem is that there are no mechanisms in Linux to ensure the technology going into Linux, he said. For a commercial entity there are processes to know where the code has come from. In the case of Linux, there’s no mechanism.
Both Red Hat and SuSE have made statements to the contrary in recent weeks, with Mark Webbink, general counsel of Red Hat stating: We take intellectual property issues very seriously. We are constantly reviewing available source code to determine its origin and whether it is protected by IP.
We have processes in place through which we make sure as much as you can that we don’t run into that trap, said SuSE’s CEO, Richard Seibt earlier this month. Part of the Autobuild process [SuSE’s product build process] is to make sure that there is no illegal code in our distribution. In open source, this was the case from the beginning.
Either way, it looks as if Red Hat, SuSE and other Linux distributors will not face the wrath of SCO’s lawyers, although that does not mean that other Unix vendors don’t have something to worry about.
There is derivative code from AIX and Sequent Dynix [in Linux], there has also been contribution of derivative code from other licensees, and there has also been Unix System V code directly copied into Linux line by line, said Sontag.
Asked if this meant that SCO was considering lawsuits against other Unix vendors Sontag was more reserved. Potentially, he said. Some of them we’re in talks with, some of them we’re not yet. Given the large number of Unix licensees there are any number of targets for SCO, although Hewlett Packard Co and Sun Microsystems Inc have both declared themselves safe from litigation.
Although more Unix vendors may become SCO legal targets, Sontag repeated his statement that the company was not out to destroy Linux, or open source software, but to protect its own rights.
With regards to SCO’s IP being transferred into Linux, it’s appropriate that we have a right to say ‘that’s not right’, he said. We don’t have an issue with open source and free software as long as it is individually developed. It’s when we’re talking about people taking commercial technologies inappropriate to their contracts and implementing them into Linux.
Source: Computerwire
