SCO Still Providing Linux Source Under GPL
On May 12, The SCO Group sent a letter to commercial Linux customers announcing "the suspension of our own Linux-related activities". On May 14, SCO announced they are ceasing to sell Linux.
However, SCO is still, as of this writing (May 22), providing Linux source code. When I wrote the review of SCO Linux 4 (see the June 2003 issue of Linux Journal, page 78), SCO provided me with a temporary account on their update service so I could review it. I still have a test computer with SCO Linux installed on it, and I used apt-get to download the Linux kernel from the SCO apt server (linuxupdate.sco.com). I downloaded and installed the "kernel-source#2.4.19.SuSE-106@i586_2.4.19.SuSE-106_i586.rpm" package.
The Linux kernel is licensed under the terms of the GNU General Public License.
SCO has stated, "SCO continues to honor our contractual relationships with customers; and will continue to support our Linux customers."
SCO to Reveal Allegedly Copied Code
Torvalds Suggests DiBona for SCO Panel
SCO: We're After IBM, not Linux Developers
The New SCO: Lessons for Linux in Business
Geeks on Bikes: The SCO Group/Caldera Product Development Plan
Steve Hasting first used UNIX on actual paper teletypes. He enjoys bicycling, music, petting his cat and making his Linux computers do new things.
email: steve@hastings.org
Realizing the promise of Apache® Hadoop® requires the effective deployment of compute, memory, storage and networking to achieve optimal results. With its flexibility and multitude of options, it is easy to over or under provision the server infrastructure, resulting in poor performance and high TCO. Join us for an in depth, technical discussion with industry experts from leading Hadoop and server companies who will provide insights into the key considerations for designing and deploying an optimal Hadoop cluster.
Sponsored by AMD
Built-in forensics, incident response, and security with Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
Every security policy provides guidance and requirements for ensuring adequate protection of information and data, as well as high-level technical and administrative security requirements for a system in a given environment. Traditionally, providing security for a system focuses on the confidentiality of the information on it. However, protecting the data integrity and system and data availability is just as important. For example, when processing United States intelligence information, there are three attributes that require protection: confidentiality, integrity, and availability.
Learn more about catching the bad guy in this free white paper.
Sponsored by DLT Solutions
| Dynamic DNS—an Object Lesson in Problem Solving | May 21, 2013 |
| Using Salt Stack and Vagrant for Drupal Development | May 20, 2013 |
| Making Linux and Android Get Along (It's Not as Hard as It Sounds) | May 16, 2013 |
| Drupal Is a Framework: Why Everyone Needs to Understand This | May 15, 2013 |
| Home, My Backup Data Center | May 13, 2013 |
| Non-Linux FOSS: Seashore | May 10, 2013 |
- RSS Feeds
- Dynamic DNS—an Object Lesson in Problem Solving
- Making Linux and Android Get Along (It's Not as Hard as It Sounds)
- Using Salt Stack and Vagrant for Drupal Development
- New Products
- A Topic for Discussion - Open Source Feature-Richness?
- Validate an E-Mail Address with PHP, the Right Way
- Drupal Is a Framework: Why Everyone Needs to Understand This
- What's the tweeting protocol?
- Tech Tip: Really Simple HTTP Server with Python
- Kernel Problem
1 min 52 sec ago - BASH script to log IPs on public web server
4 hours 28 min ago - DynDNS
8 hours 4 min ago - Reply to comment | Linux Journal
8 hours 37 min ago - All the articles you talked
11 hours 40 sec ago - All the articles you talked
11 hours 3 min ago - All the articles you talked
11 hours 5 min ago - myip
15 hours 29 min ago - Keeping track of IP address
17 hours 20 min ago - Roll your own dynamic dns
22 hours 34 min ago
Enter to Win an Adafruit Pi Cobbler Breakout Kit for Raspberry Pi

It's Raspberry Pi month at Linux Journal. Each week in May, Adafruit will be giving away a Pi-related prize to a lucky, randomly drawn LJ reader. Winners will be announced weekly.
Fill out the fields below to enter to win this week's prize-- a Pi Cobbler Breakout Kit for Raspberry Pi.
Congratulations to our winners so far:
- 5-8-13, Pi Starter Pack: Jack Davis
- 5-15-13, Pi Model B 512MB RAM: Patrick Dunn
- 5-21-13, Prototyping Pi Plate Kit: Philip Kirby
- Next winner announced on 5-27-13!
Free Webinar: Hadoop
How to Build an Optimal Hadoop Cluster to Store and Maintain Unlimited Amounts of Data Using Microservers
Realizing the promise of Apache® Hadoop® requires the effective deployment of compute, memory, storage and networking to achieve optimal results. With its flexibility and multitude of options, it is easy to over or under provision the server infrastructure, resulting in poor performance and high TCO. Join us for an in depth, technical discussion with industry experts from leading Hadoop and server companies who will provide insights into the key considerations for designing and deploying an optimal Hadoop cluster.
Some of key questions to be discussed are:
- What is the “typical” Hadoop cluster and what should be installed on the different machine types?
- Why should you consider the typical workload patterns when making your hardware decisions?
- Are all microservers created equal for Hadoop deployments?
- How do I plan for expansion if I require more compute, memory, storage or networking?



Comments
Re: SCO Still Providing Linux Source Under GPL
I'm really confused here? What does this little article have to do with LJ? Is LJ owned or partnered in some way with SCO? It seems this article is a simple SCO blurb and nothing close to an informative article I'd usually find on LJ?
LJ, Please comment on this.
Thank You
Linux for Springbreak
Jepp - that is it 8-) spring-break
SCO Commited Copyright Infringement
SCO has actually claimed that the the linux kernel as they distributed it is NOT properly licenced under the GPL.
They claim that IBM had no authority to mix their Unix code with the linux kernel and therefore that the resulting work is not actually GPL'd. See here for details of this claim. They are actually correct as regards IBM's original creation of this mix, assuming (big assumption) that their claim is actually true.
The problem of this is that the GPL requires SCO, when they distribute either modified sources (GPL 2b) or object code (GPL 3), to place the work "as a whole" under the GPL, regardless of any licencing issues prior. Thus it is no defense, as they imply per the above link, to claim to have received an improperly licenced work. Just as they claim the creation and distribution of a mix of linux and SCO-owned unix violates their copyrights as the owner of the unix portions, so to does THEIR distribution of the same code constitute copyright infringement of the GPL'd portions of the kernel.
In order to win their lawsuit against IBM for creating the linux/unix mix, they have to prove their own infringement by distributing the same without licence. It really doesn't matter whether this infringement was "knowing". Moreover, since they continue to distribute this allegedly improperly licenced linux/unix mix, one can only conclude that they are now doing so knowingly and wilfully, which differentiates them from everybody else who doesn't believe their claims and can't even evaluate their claims because SCO refuses to make public the evidence.
The other possiblitly is that because the GPL says that the act of distribution constitutes agreement, this will be enforced and IBM will have the affirmative defense of explicit authorization after the fact. This would prove that the GPL is "viral" at least for organizations that ship GPL code without knowing what is in it. Then again, selling code without inspecting it carefully under terms written by somebody else that surrender certain IP rights is probably not something that you should ever do if you don't want to give up your IP rights.
Re: SCO Commited Copyright Infringement
I'm really confused here? What does this little article have to do with LJ? Is LJ owned or partnered in some way with SCO? It seems this article is a simple SCO blurb and nothing close to an informative article I'd usually find on LJ?
LJ, Please comment on this.
Thank You
SCO even more stupidly funny
I also presume since the original terms of sale were unchanged, each and every SCO customer has a valid GPL licensed distribution that allows them to further redistribute! I suppose the worst case scenareo is one where every Linux distributor and user would then have to have a derived GNU/Linux system they could trace back to an original SCO customer?!
Re: SCO Still Providing Linux Source Under GPL
As long as they distribute compiled software that is GPL/LGPL, the source is up for grabs for up to 3 years from the time they distributed it to you. Any compiled software that is GPL/LGPL that they sold which includes the source, they don't have to redistribute that, but if they provide updates to the program (in compiled form), then you have to right to get a copy of the source (for the updated parts) up to a minimum of 3 years from the time you got the updates.
3. b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,