On Sunday, 27 July 2003 at 16:06:54 +1000, Con Zymaris wrote: > On Sun, Jul 27, 2003 at 11:00:03AM +0930, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: >>> >>> I would suggest that AUUG and LA prep a media release alerting the local >>> media that SCO have been telling porkies. >> >> No, what they're doing is being inconsistent. I'm sure it wasn't >> intentional. If we say anything, they'll just remove it from the ftp >> site. >> >>> Not only did SCO not stop distributing the complete Linux kernel >>> when they say they did, they continue to distribute it now, under a >>> regime indicatating the GPL as the only licence applicable to the >>> RPM package contents. >> >> This is passive distribution. > > Why the differentiation? Because it would be very difficult to prove intent. > If they do remove the source package, are we are able to raise that > as a GPL violation to any effect? I couldn't see how. As far as I can remember, they never did binary-only distributions, so they don't have any specific obligation to supply sources. Even if they did, the GNU license doesn't state that they have to do so on an FTP site, nor that they can't take them off the FTP site. Or were you thinking of something else? >> if they were to demand license fees, it would only be illegal if it >> could be shown that they did not, indeed, own Linux. We know that >> they don't, but the courts don't. >> >> I'm sure there's something to be done here. The trouble is that the > > I see this as a battle on two fronts. One, as you correctly allude to > above, is the real battle that may happen in the courts. However, there is > another, more pertinent and perhaps even more important battle; the > battle of perception. Certainly, and that's the one that SCO is fighting at the moment. > There's a lot that can be done to deflate the SCO balloon, without > resporting to the complete undertanding of the Trade Practices > Act. I will leave the real battle to those far more able to conduct > such campaigns than I, and I'll focus on ensuring the public knows > that SCO is performing possibly suspect acts, and that it does not, > and should not, expect to succeed in its aims. Sure, more power to you. Greg -- See complete headers for address and phone numbers
Attachment:
pgp00005.pgp
Description: PGP signature