Updated reverse-engineered Final Disclosure allegations


July 18, 2006

Folks, I've just finished a marathon update to the 294 Alleged Violations list at http://www.geocities.com/nobbutl/index.html based on information in SCO's recent Objections (document 724 and its Appendix A). Big thanks to Dr Panglozz for priming the pump on this one. Dozens of new and updated items "all over the map" (to borrow Linus' overworked phrase).


One can readily see SCO have failed to make any defence of huge swathes of the struck items - eg, most of the low numbers below 111. Reading Appendix A carefully, most of the snootily defended "line-for-line copied code" items are actually not items that IBM challenged! They are trotted out simply to defend SCO's public pronouncements.

The majority of the remaining Items have now been characterised as "line-for-line copying" though in very many cases the rights claimed are contractual.

STREAMS accounts for no fewer than 15 of the ongoing items. That's a significant proportion of what's left for a technology that's not mainstream (har!har!main-*Stream*!har!!!) Linux and almost nobody uses. Carrier Grade Linux is fingered.

SCO's BOGOF (Buy One Get One Free) trick on Items 46 and 236. They count first strike for talking about a patch, second strike for submitting the patch. Best of all, we have turned up the actual LKML disclosure (thanks i_s_g) and it's *NOTHING* to do with Unix *AT* *ALL*. They are claiming contractual rights over Sequent's knowlege of an unacknowleged Intel hardware bug in the old Pentium APIC!!! Read the LKML post, it's a hoot: http://lkml.org/lkml/2003/2/26/272

Say goodbye to non-literal copying: Wells flushed every single item :-)

It looks clear, from the structure of the list, that the *only* "SCO Classic" straight copyright claims are 183/184 (ABI) and 185 (definitely our old friend atemalloc). yay! w00t!

From the structure of the list, and from the way 724 rarely qualifies item numbers below 204 as October or December, it appears that December's extra items were simply tagged on the end from 205 upwards.

And finally, yes, at some future time I'll move that page away from Y!Geocities. The only reason for using that feeble cesspool was its direct association with Yahoo, but now that's more of a bug than a feature.
< EOM >

10:21:38 PM 

Source: Investor Village SCO Board [ http://www.investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=1911 ]

Copyright 2006