Re: the source, so to speak, of the SCO lawsuit

I hate when the 'reply to' isn't fsb.

Quick response (again); maybe better thought out.

I think my perspective may be misunderstood.

Here's my perspective: No matter how the SCO lawsuit ends, and what 
happens in between, I'll have to live my life and make the best of it - 
either way. As such, the case itself isn't as important to me as the 
motive. From all I've read, and from all I've seen, there's no sensible 
motive from SCO as a standalone case.

Because of that, maybe I look at the case differently. The case is a 
fact, and will pass. The motive may not be as clearcut as the case, and 
if the motive - whatever it is - is met, I'd rather look into those 
implications on what I do as a developer, and a user.

In essence, I cannot affect the case. Neither can the rest of the world, 
though the outcome of the case could affect the rest of the world. We 
will, however, need to move on. And if the motive for the case is 
understood... then the implications would be understood better... and 
maybe we could plan better.

The lawsuit I leave to the lawyers.

Maybe that will clear up why I said what I said, and how I said it.

Taran
http://www.knowprose.com

David Nicely wrote:

> I'm not sure what law or proposed law you're refering to here.
> I haven't seen anyone actually accuse Microsoft of anything illegal.

> I'm also not sure that Microsoft's stature (internationally or 
> otherwise) has anything to do with this case as is.

>
>
> but then again...
>
> From a semi-skeptical view,
> MS wants to discredit the GPL the best they can, to enforce their 
> opinion that GPL is volotile and cannot be included within proprietary 
> software, and whatever else their reasoning is to keep people using 
> completely closed proprietary software.
>
> Although there have be studies (as well as common sense) that prove 
> them wrong. 
> (http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/04/24/1050777342086.html)
> It's still in their best interest to discredit GPL and Opensource as a 
> whole, however subtle they think they're being.
>
> As much as I dislike Microsoft and hate their Marketing strategies, I 
> haven't found a reason to assume they are doing bad here....
> Unless of course, they're trying to aquire rights to unix code so they 
> can collect royalties from everyone (everyone not already paying them 
> royalties anyway) and even come out with their own MS-Linux version..:)
>
> I'm sure we all can come up with a ton of speculations about this.
>
> Any of these speculations and reasons all sum up to one thing.
> Microsoft is worried (or possibly hopefull) that SCO will win this case.
>
>