Linux dev process makes SCO's claims plausible

The BBC has an interesting take on the recent SCO scandal that's worth a read. Though the author certainly doesn't come off as an SCO or Microsoft fanboy, he has some reservations about how dismissive the Linux community has been of SCO's claims because of the nature of the Linux development process.
But this relies on someone recognising that submitted code came from somewhere else.

There is no formal mechanism for ensuring that the developers are not submitting code which does not belongs to them, only this unstructured peer review and that may not be enough.

The article also suggests the Linux community should be less critical of SCO's desire to defend its copyrights because the open source GPL license relies heavily on copyright law.

Of course, the author doesn't really tackle SCO's licensing fee scare tactics or its apparent unwillingness to reveal the full details of its copyright infringement claim. I'd like to think that the Linux community is more enraged by SCO's questionable tactics than by the fact that it could actually have a case.

Tip: You can use the A/Z keys to walk threads.
View options

This discussion is now closed.