by 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...."
---
"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."
-------