Could open-source be illegal someday?

[Leo J Mauler]

On Mon, 26 Jan 2004 22:32:05 -0600 <kurt at verruckt.org> writes:
> Have any of your guys and gals read this?
>
> http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,4149,1455175,00.asp
>
> My god what is wrong with SCO?!?!?!  When they
> eventually go bankrupt, we should throw a party :)

Everyone should read this related article, which took a few clicks from
the above article to read.

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,4149,1400107,00.asp

In particular, SCO's own *inability* to decide whether or not the GPL is
a valid and effective copyright permission:

===============
"SCO's legal situation contains an inherent contradiction," Moglen writes
in the paper. "SCO claims, in the letters it has sent to large corporate
users of free software and in public statements demanding that users of
recent versions of the kernel take licenses, that the Linux program
contains material over which SCO holds copyright."
SCO has also brought trade-secret claims against IBM, alleging that IBM
contributed material covered by nondisclosure licenses or agreements to
the Linux kernel. But SCO distributed, and continues to distribute, Linux
under the GPL (General Public License), thereby publishing its supposed
trade secrets and copyrighted material under a license that gives
permission to copy, modify and redistribute, Moglen writes.
"If the GPL means what it says, SCO loses its trade secret lawsuit
against IBM, and cannot carry out its threats against users of the Linux
kernel," Moglen writes. "But if the GPL is not a valid and effective
copyright permission, by what right is SCO distributing the copyrighted
works of Linux's contributors, and the authors of all the other
copyrighted software it currently purports to distribute under GPL?"
===============