To simplify, to me the SCO vs. Novell Trial of 2003, sounds like a
mere case of a Copyright battle over which company actually owns the
source code that was created for Unix and some Linux OS's. SCO filed a
lawsuit and said that Novel committed a crime by claiming the code was
theirs. The Asset Transfer Agreement from September 19, 1995 was
misinterpreted and probably poorly written from the beginning. May 28,
2003, Novell claimed it transferred certain assets, but they did not
transfer any copyrights. Novell in turn counter sued SCO who claimed
Novell breached a contract and committed "Slander of Title" and also
claimed that the Asset Transfer Agreement did not transfer the rights that
SCO had wished for. June 10, 2010 a judge ruled in favor for Novell and
found that they did not commit any slander or that copy rights had to be
transferred. Rumor has it that SCO appealed the ruling July 7, 2010. I
would say it is possibly not over until the appeal process is ruled on and
completed.
mere case of a Copyright battle over which company actually owns the
source code that was created for Unix and some Linux OS's. SCO filed a
lawsuit and said that Novel committed a crime by claiming the code was
theirs. The Asset Transfer Agreement from September 19, 1995 was
misinterpreted and probably poorly written from the beginning. May 28,
2003, Novell claimed it transferred certain assets, but they did not
transfer any copyrights. Novell in turn counter sued SCO who claimed
Novell breached a contract and committed "Slander of Title" and also
claimed that the Asset Transfer Agreement did not transfer the rights that
SCO had wished for. June 10, 2010 a judge ruled in favor for Novell and
found that they did not commit any slander or that copy rights had to be
transferred. Rumor has it that SCO appealed the ruling July 7, 2010. I
would say it is possibly not over until the appeal process is ruled on and
completed.
No comments:
Post a Comment