Original Message from NTLUG's mailing list follows:
Apparently a German fellow managed to get a look at SCO's "evidence"
without the NDA restrictions. He then turned and posted some of it on a
message board! His explanation for the NDA discrepancy is that there was
some negligence on the part of SCO's lawyers.
The original post (in German):
The Googled translation (difficult to read):
Two key points I take away from this, if my grokking of the translation is
1) SCO tampered with their "evidence" by removing date stamps. I wonder
2) A lot (all?) of SCO's evidence isn't actually taken from the kernel
sources, but from mailing-list postings whose contributions may or may not
have become stock kernel merges.
I'm guessing a certain SCO attorney is never going to work in the state of
...oh wait, yes he will. SCO's probably going to be dead in a year
-- Kelledin "If a server crashes in a server farm and no one pings it,
does it still cost four figures to fix?"