SCO/Linux?

Would someone like to explain this whole SCO, Linux and GPL gubbins that's going on for I am muchly confused?

what exactly is you want to know? :razz:

Gwil said:
what exactly is you want to know? :razz:

mental balloon forms over head

says to self

"man, i am so glad i am not the only stupid one, i got lost after "Would someone like to explain ...." :cool:

All I can tell you is that Linux is an operating system. I have no idea what SCO and GPL are. Don't worry Orph, you're not alone in ignorance :biggrin: I can't even understand the question.

Well, a wee bit of research tells me that SCO 'own' Unix, and Linux is based off Unix (IBMs fault), so they want money from Linux users. But I kind of get lost at the anti-GPL stuff going on, and how they managed to distribute their own version of Linux (contrary to their current position)?

/me runs in

I know! I know!

Please sir, SCO (formerly Caldera Systems) claims to hold the copyright to Unix (that is, the proprietary OS as opposed to the free Linux) source code, and claim that Linux has portions of code that were appropriated from Unix. The Free Software Foundation deny this.

Caldera was a publisher of a Linux distro, Caldera OpenLinux. SCO have recently removed this product from their site.

The GNU General Public License, or GPL, is a software distribution license designed by the Free Software Foundation in order to encourage the sharing of source code and remove the idea of 'ownership' of software and ideas. In effect, it says 3 things:

• 1. You can have it for free, and you can have the source code for free.
• 2. You can change the source code and redistribute it.
• 3. If you redistribute it, you have to put it under this license so everyone else can learn from it too.

Linux is GPL'ed software. Unix is not. SCO is attacking the GPL because it advocates the distribution of source which it claims to own.

Now, Linux is not based off Unix, Lep. Linux (which is the kernel, not the OS in its entirety) was started by a Finnish student and was developed by a worldwide team of hackers. Linux is a clone of Unix.

For a very long time, SCO refused to let the world see the source code that it claims has been copied into Linux ("We assert x, but damned if we're going to let you see our proof!"). However, they released fractions of the source. Most of it was comments. ("PROOF!"). More information on the FSF's position can be found here. SCO is suing IBM.

<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
"With more than 2.4 million Linux servers running our software and thousands more running Linux every day, we expect SCO to be compensated for the benefits realized by tens of thousands of customers." Darl McBride, SCO CEO

[/quote]
However, Novell has stepped in, and announced that SCO doesn't own the Unix source code: Novell does. (Cue six million hackers shouting 'hurrah!')

Regarding the GPL, I quote Eben Moglen, who has been coordinating IBM's lawyers and assisting the FSF in this issue.

<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
According to the Journal, Mr Heise announced that SCO would challenge the GPL's "legality" on the ground that the GPL permits licensees to make unlimited copies of programs it covers, while copyright law only allows a single copy to be made. The GPL, the Journal quoted Mr Heise as saying, "is preempted by federal copyright law."

This argument is frivolous, by which I mean that it would be a violation of professional obligation for Mr Heise or any other lawyer to submit it to a court. If it were true, no copyright license could permit the licensee to make multiple copies of the licensed program. That would make not just the GPL "illegal." Mr Heise's supposed theory would also invalidate the BSD, Apache, AFL, OSL, MIT/X11, and all other free software licenses. It would invalidate the Microsoft Shared Source license. It would also eliminate Microsoft's method for the distribution of the Windows operating system, which is pre-loaded by hard drive manufacturers onto disk drives they deliver by the hundreds of thousands to PC manufacturers. The licenses under which the disk drive and PC manufacturers make multiple copies of Microsoft's OS would also, according to Mr Heise, violate the law. Redmond will be surprised.

[/quote]
For more information, search for 'SCO' on NewsForge, or visit WeLoveTheSCOInformationMinister.

/me laughs and goes back to his nice new Slackware 9.1 box

DesPlesda said:
Linux is a <I>clone <I>of Unix.

Ah, a particularly dodgy key phrase. I'm betting you're also overjoyed about mumblings about a possible Microsoft/Google merger? :smile:

Des, how is slackware? I've never tried but I heard good things - i'm considering dipping my toes back into the clear and pure linux pool again soon. It's Debian or something else i'm likely to choose...

oooh, googlenet explorer, i can't wait.

<!--StartFragment -->

Red Hat 9 for me. Since I know very little about Linux (for now... muahahaha) Red Hat is a great place to start. Just don't get too dependent on RPMs and such.

Gwil said:
Des, how is slackware? I've never tried but I heard good things - i'm considering dipping my toes back into the clear and pure linux pool again soon. It's Debian or something else i'm likely to choose...

It's my favourite, because it's not loaded with 'features' like Red Hat or Mandrake, and is remarkably easy use. (login; 'startx'; huzzah) Installation is slightly tricky (I had a friend help me out there), but once configured it's bloody brilliant. Good for gaming also.

LindowsCD all the way for me :razz: cause im too lazy to install linux i just use the LindowsCD too boot off and it works great

damn.....

did you see the size of the melon on that kid??...

Doc B... :dodgy: at best :razz:

Slack is okey, just has real crappy hardware detection.

Goto www.linuxquestions.org - even if you've never heard of linux they wont mind explaining it, great guys are plentifull there. very few n00b haters.

and linux is NOT a clone of unix ( it is ), its just built off unix. Unix is nothing like linux how it is today.

Dont worry xconspirisist, I've had plenty of experience in Linux :smile: Ran an intranet webpage server via telnet, which used Debian, and have had Mandrake/Redhat and Debian client machines before :smile:

Thanks anyway.

/ me bows

didnt mean you gwil, wouldent dare question an uberlord, I meant for the sake of others, and orph :smile:

telnet http server, thats pretty hardcore...