by http://www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/21722.html, newsFACTOR.com
Analyst Finds SCO's Claims Tough To Verify,
http://www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/21722.html
Analyst Finds SCO's Claims Tough To Verify
James Maguire, June 13, 2003
"I specifically asked SCO if they had any evidence that IBM directly
copied System V source code into Linux. The reply was no," says Aberdeen
analyst Bill Claybrook. "SCO has subsequently changed that reply...."
After examining the programming code that SCO Group claims was copied
from Unix into Linux, Aberdeen Group analyst Bill Claybrook said he
cannot conclude whether or not SCO's legal claims of copyright
infringement have merit. Claybrook's response is contained in a new
Aberdeen report entitled "SCO-IBM Lawsuit: Time for Some Changes?" In
it, he discusses his experience of examining the code, as well as the
larger ramifications of the pending legal action.
---
"I wasn't able to look at the files on the computer, so, all I can say
is, 'I saw this stuff, and I don't know whether it's true or not.'"
---
"And what's weird about it is, it wasn't like they copied the whole
function," Claybrook said, referring to the programmers who allegedly
copied code. "If you pull pieces of code from one program to another, it
means you have to integrate them into your code, and then test with
everything else," he said. "It just doesn't make sense -- why not take
the whole function?"
---
Confusion Reigns
"I specifically asked SCO if they had any evidence that IBM directly
copied System V source code into Linux. The reply was no," Claybrook
wrote in his report. "SCO has subsequently changed that reply to, 'We
have that code but we have not presented it at this time.'"
---
"Whenever I asked the question, Chris Sontag, the VP there, told me no,"
Claybrook said. "But then I got an e-mail 8 to 10 hours later from Blake
Stowell, director of PR, that said they had 'misspoken' -- they did have
evidence that IBM had directly copied code."
---
As Forrester analyst Stacey Quandt said to NewsFactor, "While the merits
of SCO's case remain to be proven, in the end Linux will continue to be
a viable alternative to Windows and Unix."
-------
from Aberdeen Report:
"SCO-IBM Lawsuit: Time for Some Changes?"
http://www.aberdeen.com
(Need to register to read report.)
---
Synopsis
This analyst was one of three analysts to whom SCO showed the System V
source code (and comments) that it alleges was directly copied into
Linux by a large IHV (not IBM or Sun). Based on what SCO showed, the
amount of alleged copied code and comments in the .c function amounted
to about 80 lines. SCO claims that other IHVs have directly copied
System V code into Linux.
---
I specifically asked SCO if they had any evidence that IBM directly
copied System V source code into Linux. The reply was no. SCO has
subsequently changed that reply to, We have that code but we have not
presented it at this time.
---
IBM claims that it owns the derivative code and can do anything with
it that it wants. SCO agrees that IBM owns the journaling file system
code .., but SCO says that they cannot release the code outside of the
operating system (Dynix, AIX) in which it was developed. Both operating
systems are based on System V.
---
.. The key is how to improve the Linux development process without
harming the open source development process, which is the basis for both
Linuxs popularity and its advantages over proprietary operating systems.
-------