[Joe Bonforte]

What I don't understand is the Linux guys have offered to fix the problem by removing SCO code and replacing it with open source.

I think I can explain SCO's point of view on that. Suppose you were the author of a book, and another book turned up in the bookstores with portions of your book included, but with no acknowledgement or payment to you. You confront the author/editor, who says, "I'm sure it was accidental. Just tell me the parts that we copied, and we'll rewrite those."

In your mind, does that absolve the author or editor from responsibility for plagarism? Keep in mind that the originally printed books are going to be out there no matter what.

Similarly, if SCO has a copyright-infringement case, then even if Linux is changed today, there will be many copies of Linux still out there. And just saying, "Hey, it was all an accident" does not absolve those who appropriated intellectual property.

The big problem here, and the biggest difference from the book case posited above, is that no one owns Linux in any meaningful sense. Therefore, there is no easy way to assign responsibility for copyright infringement (or any other liability issues). Whether the Linux folks want to admit it or not, this is a serious flaw in Linux for business users. (Personal users don't have any realistic concern because it's not economic to sue them.)

[N3WBI3]

But IBM is the one who copied the code (supposedly) into the kernel, Linus and the community as a whole would be happy to remove it and that would slove the problem.

What this article does not mention is that much of the copied code is being challenged to be covered by IBM Patents..

[HiTech RedNeck]

As a matter of civil law, the plaintiff (SCO) has the duty to mitigate its losses. It can't hide information from the alleged infringer if to do so would exacerbate the damages.

[steve50]

It's a more complex problem than I thought. How did SCO get in Linux to start with. I can't see Linux stealing a copyrighted product when they seem able to replace it with open source so easily.

I also don't understand the refusal of SCO to identify their code for removal. Even if previuos versions are liabile, I would think the Linux distributers have a right to remove SCO and market a new true open source version. Maybe they are just waiting for the courts to rule.

[Rifleman]

I think I can explain SCO's point of view on that. Suppose you were the author of a book, and another book turned up in the bookstores with portions of your book included, but with no acknowledgement or payment to you. You confront the author/editor, who says, "I'm sure it was accidental. Just tell me the parts that we copied, and we'll rewrite those."

This is called begging the question. You assume that some of the code was copied from SCOs IP to Linux. SCO asserts this but has produced no evidence. I could assert that I am Marie Queen of Romania but I would still be a Missouri redneck.

In your mind, does that absolve the author or editor from responsibility for plagarism? Keep in mind that the originally printed books are going to be out there no matter what.

Similarly, if SCO has a copyright-infringement case, then even if Linux is changed today, there will be many copies of Linux still out there. And just saying, "Hey, it was all an accident" does not absolve those who appropriated intellectual property.

Again, begging the question with a strawman added. No one is suggesting that any copying was accidental (if it exists) or that it would be ok if it were. If SCO has IP infringed by the Linux code, they are probably entitled to compenstion for actual damages. If any.

The big problem here, and the biggest difference from the book case posited above, is that no one owns Linux in any meaningful sense. Therefore, there is no easy way to assign responsibility for copyright infringement (or any other liability issues). Whether the Linux folks want to admit it or not, this is a serious flaw in Linux for business users. (Personal users don't have any realistic concern because it's not economic to sue them.)

Horse apples. The linux source and its evolution is as well documented as any such activity can be. The CVS archives contain records of every change ever made (well, after Linus released the first versions) and they are publicly readable.

[steve-b]

Er, SCO still has to specifically identify the allegedly infringing code in order to prove its claim that the alleged infringement happened in the first place. They don't get to refuse to do so on the grounds that people would quit infringing if they were given notice of just what exactly they were not allowed to use.