Analysts Who Saw SCO Code Begin to Pay Attention to Man Behind Curtain
Jun 13, 2003, 14:30 (54 Talkback[s])
(Other stories by Sam Varghese, Todd R. Weiss)
How to Help Your Business Become an AI Early Adopter
[ Thanks to Matt for
these links. ]
The Age: Analyst Who Saw SCO 'Evidence' Says Origin of Code a
Matter of Debate
"Have you any previous experience in reading
"No. And I am not a copyright attorney either. However, for the
purposes of authentication, I had a code developer present to
review the materials with. No one has greater respect for their
inherent limitations than I do!!!
"The 80 lines of code that appear to be related - what
proportion of the sample evidence, in terms of lines of code, does
"SCO claims it was just one example. But (it) says there are
'hundreds of thousands of derivative lines of code,' to back up its
claims. The industry will find out for certain once this case gets
to court. I wouldn't expect lawyers for either side to divulge all
of their evidence in advance. IBM and SCO are just now beginning
the 'discovery phase' of the suit. So I anticipate that more
revelations will be forthcoming over the next couple of months.
"Are the claims limited to any one area of the O/S
(kernel)? For example, UNIX SysV's implementation of shared memory
"The claims are not limited to just one area of the Unix System
V kernel. SCO claims there are multiple instances of copyright
violations. SCO said these include: NUMA (Non Uniform Memory
access) a mechanism for enabling large multiprocessing systems, RCU
(Read Copy Update) (and) SMP. All of the aforementioned functions
represent high end enterprise performance and scalability
functionality portions of the code..."
Computerworld: A Good Question: What Does the SCO Unix Code
"Claybrook said that though he was shown code that matched
between Unix and Linux, he wasn't able to determine where the code
had originated or how it might have gotten there.
"One thing that 'bothered' him, he said, is that he asked SCO
officials if they had any 'direct evidence' that IBM copied any
System V code into Linux and was first told there was no such
evidence. Hours later, he said, SCO officials called him back and
told him that they had 'misspoken' and that they did have such
"'That's kind of strange,' Claybrook said..."