SCO has completely lost it
Well SCO have finally lost the plot.
They are telling the open source community that they need to moneterise open source and that their business model is flawed.
On these two points, they are dead wrong.
Open source developers don't develop their programs because they want money, but because they want to create something that anyone who wishes to use or improve their software. If a business wants to use their software, then the developer does not have an issue with that, and don't expect compensation for it.
Also, the open source development model was never supposed to be a business model. Open source is not a business. If it was, the above point would be invalid. By my understanding, the aim of the open source community is to provide software that is as close to free as possible, and to allow others to modify and improve the code if they so wish. The aim was never to provide businesses with software only, even though a business may use open source software if they wish.
Darl McBride and SCO do not understand these concepts. They want to commercialise open source, which is contradictory to the philosophy of open source if you could put it that way.
Essentially SCO are trying to "buy" Linux for want of a better way of putting it, because they believe that they can make a lot of money out of it. Personally, there must be something wrond with the way they do things if they are trying to take over something that would produce them more revenue than they currently get.
The open source community is more than happy to remove any of the offending code that SCO claims has been copied into the Linux kernel, however there would probably be two reasons why they don't want this to happen:
They are telling the open source community that they need to moneterise open source and that their business model is flawed.
On these two points, they are dead wrong.
Open source developers don't develop their programs because they want money, but because they want to create something that anyone who wishes to use or improve their software. If a business wants to use their software, then the developer does not have an issue with that, and don't expect compensation for it.
Also, the open source development model was never supposed to be a business model. Open source is not a business. If it was, the above point would be invalid. By my understanding, the aim of the open source community is to provide software that is as close to free as possible, and to allow others to modify and improve the code if they so wish. The aim was never to provide businesses with software only, even though a business may use open source software if they wish.
Darl McBride and SCO do not understand these concepts. They want to commercialise open source, which is contradictory to the philosophy of open source if you could put it that way.
Essentially SCO are trying to "buy" Linux for want of a better way of putting it, because they believe that they can make a lot of money out of it. Personally, there must be something wrond with the way they do things if they are trying to take over something that would produce them more revenue than they currently get.
The open source community is more than happy to remove any of the offending code that SCO claims has been copied into the Linux kernel, however there would probably be two reasons why they don't want this to happen:
- They don't want to reveal the code as this would not allow a revenue stream from licencing their IP to corporations.
- They know they are making false claims. As a result, they cannot release details about the offending code because there is little to none, and as a result, they know that they cannot release the information for their repuatation.