Linux Today: Linux News On Internet Time.

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)

[ 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 code?

"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 this represent?

"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 or similar.

"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..."

Complete Story

Computerworld: A Good Question: What Does the SCO Unix Code Reveal?

"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 evidence.

"'That's kind of strange,' Claybrook said..."

Complete Story

Related Stories: