[TUHS] sco v. ibm
kstailey at yahoo.com
Tue May 27 12:45:58 AEST 2003
--- Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog at lemis.com> wrote:
> On Friday, 23 May 2003 at 11:00:51 -0400, T.M. Sommers wrote:
> > Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
> >> On Thursday, 22 May 2003 at 7:54:03 -0400, Norman Wilson wrote:
> >>> I haven't come up to speed yet on SCOIBM Wars (pronounce it as you
> >>> like, but perhaps not in polite company), but even so I know enough
> >>> to ask a question: is anyone in possession of a signed, original,
> >>> genuine, non-electronic copy of the Bill Broderick letter of 23 Jan 2002
> >>> that granted a mostly free license (as long as credit given and Caldera's
> >>> name not used in vain) for 32V, V7, and predecessors?
> >> This is a question I've been asking for some time. Sadly, nobody has
> >> answered "yes". See also the message I sent yesterday: SCO have also
> >> maid claims which suggest they don't recognize the statement.
> > If he was their agent, then it doesn't matter what they claim to
> > recognize now; they are bound by his statement.
> Yes, of course. The issue here is whether we can prove that the
> statement was made.
The fact that they are not threatened by TUHS the way they are by Linux will
probably make them ignore TUHS but you never know.
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
More information about the TUHS