All Things Microsoft > Microsoft Software

Public Lisense.... bad idea??

<< < (2/4) > >>

flap:
Well you couldn't, but I thought he was suggesting Microsoft definitely has done that. Actually I don't think he is. However...

 
quote: i dont think thats a violation of the GNU, becuause you are allowed to gain profit, but thats down right douche bagish (for lack of better terms).
--- End quote ---


Incorporating GPL code into proprietary software is illegal, it's not just "douche baggish".

Aloone_Jonez:
"douche baggish"
Lol, that's a new one, it sound's French.
What does it mean?
I would guess it means dodgy/crooked by it's context.

insomnia:
MS bought SCO code for their OS.
All the rest are third party apps.

[ July 15, 2004: Message edited by: insomnia ]

Orethrius:
Okay, so this really is more MS douchebaggery considering that SCO Group never had, doesn't now , and never will own the rights to Linux.  Torvalds created the kernel, and though it WAS based IN CONCEPT on UNIX, that does not mean that SCO can automatically cry foul over it.  They have to prove that the code was stolen in the first place.  They have the burden of proof and have, so far, chosen to bide their time rather than strike with whatever weakass evidence they THINK they may have against him.

insomnia:

quote:Originally posted by Midnight Candidate:
Okay, so this really is more MS douchebaggery considering that SCO Group never had, doesn't now , and never will own the rights to Linux.  Torvalds created the kernel, and though it WAS based IN CONCEPT on UNIX, that does not mean that SCO can automatically cry foul over it.  They have to prove that the code was stolen in the first place.  They have the burden of proof and have, so far, chosen to bide their time rather than strike with whatever weakass evidence they THINK they may have against him.
--- End quote ---


Well...
Their does exist a counter claim that SCO used some Linux code, but I don't think MS is stupid enough to buy these parts.

The real SCO vs Linux case has nothing to do with this.
SCO only claims that IBM used some shared code(based on UNIX code), taken from AIX(both SCO  
and IBM) and placed it in the Linux kernel.
All the other(even more retarted) claims came later.

[ July 15, 2004: Message edited by: insomnia ]

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version