Creator of Linux defends its originality

Linus Torvalds, creator of the popular Linux computer operating system, defended his work Monday as not always lovely but original--and certainly not copied, as a Utah company has contended. ... SCO has for months made the broad claim that Linux included large chunks of copied Unix code. But the letters being sent out--urging companies to stop using Linux or to pay SCO license fees--listed for the first time more than 65 software files that "have been copied verbatim from our copyrighted Unix code and contributed to Linux." ... ... The files listed in SCO's letter are written in the C programming language. Citing two files, "include/linux/ctype.h" and "lib/ctype.h," Torvalds said "some trivial digging shows that those files are actually there in the original 0.01 distribution of Linux" in September 1991. "I wrote them," Torvalds noted, "and looking at the original ones, I'm a bit ashamed." ... ... He observed that some of the macros, or programming shortcuts, are "so horribly ugly that I wouldn't admit to writing them if it wasn't because somebody else claimed to have done so ;)"--ending his comment with the e-mail symbol for winking and smiling. ... ____________________ Generally, in a copyright ownership dispute, if you can prove the 'process' by which the work was created, you've pretty much won the dispute. "Here is my original work, and here is revision B,C,D, & E along with this final revision." I think Linus has the documentation to 'prove' he's the originator of the Linux kernel. Along the same lines, Novell Inc. is reasserting the claim that it, and not The SCO Group Inc., owns the copyright to the Unix System V source code that has been at the heart of a protracted dispute between SCO and the Linux community. ... ... Novell purchased rights to the Unix System V code for $150 million from AT&T Corp. in 1992, but later sold the Unix rights, which were eventually acquired by SCO. In May, Novell said that it had retained copyright over the Unix source code, but seemed to back off this claim after SCO produced a 1996 contract amendment that appeared to grant it the Unix copyright. The amendment "appears to support SCO's claim that ownership of certain copyrights for Unix did transfer to SCO in 1996," Novell said at the time. ... ... But Novell clearly hasn't given up the fight over copyright ownership. In addition to the media statement, the company also provided copies of correspondence between Joseph A. LaSala Jr., Novell's vice president, general counsel and secretary, and SCO, which argued that the amendment provided for a copyright transfer only under certain conditions and that SCO had failed to meet those conditions ... ... McBride (SCO Group's CEO) accused Novell of registering the Unix copyright in order to help IBM with an ongoing legal dispute between SCO and IBM. "Very clearly, they're getting money funded to them by IBM right now," he said, referring to a recent $50 million IBM investment in Novell. "We get a lot of communications that come from Novell where they CC IBM." ... ... Whatever Novell's motivation, its latest moves help IBM with its court case, Byer said. "IBM can now wave around SCO's registration and say, 'They don't own this at all,' and that means that SCO will have to put up more proof," he said. "It's an effective trial prop for IBM." ... ____________________ Well... duh? Yes, that was a smart move, especially if Novell can 'prove' they own it (the jury is still out on that one :)). They can finally put this issue to rest. It's the SCO's fault for not enforcing the copyright from the very start. We need to have the copyright law state (in one form or fashion) that if you don't enforce your copyright, you lose it - period. This is the same issue with the .jpg & .mp3 file formats. No one tried enforcing copyrights until those file types were so widely used. It basically rendered those file types as public domain. Ok, SCO - get over it. You were/are a dying company. Be dead, already! Look at Disney. The time was coming (and passed) that their precious copyrighted characters were about to step into the public domain - so Disney bought a Senator or two and received 25 extra years on their copyright. Umm.... so what's gonna happen when those copyrights are up? Buy another Senator? That's ludicrous. I think the SCO needs to pay me for having to read and hear (on the news) about their last, sorry efforts to make money. I think the time has come and gone to enforce the Unix copyright. At best, they could (if they really are the owners - still out for debate - albeit, not much of a debate...) start charging for any new usage of "their" code.... But what happens when its proven they are not the owners??? It's a waiting game.... gak.