Re: SCO offers UnixWare licenses for Linux

[Stephan von Krawczynski <skraw@ithnet.com>]

On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 19:34:06 +0200
Felipe Alfaro Solana <felipe_alfaro@linuxmail.org> wrote:

> On Thu, 2003-07-24 at 17:08, Larry McVoy wrote:
> 
> > There seems to be a prevailing opinion that if there is stolen code in
> > Linux that came from SCO owned code that all that needs to be done is
> > to remove it and everything is fine.  I don't think it works that way.
> > If code was stolen and the fact that it is in Linux helped destroy
> > SCO's business then SCO has the right to try and get damages.  I.e.,
> > Linux damaged SCO by using the code.
> 
> I see the point but... Take Linux as a community. Let's say someone
> contributes stolen code, but the community doesn't check if the
> contributed code violates any IP or copyright law. So, is the Linux
> community guilty? Or else should the one that contributed code be
> considered guilty?
> 
> We can't be liable for the work of others over which we don't have total
> control. Or is the law forcing us to check line by line the
> contributions made by hundreds of programmers all around the world?

... and the winner is: Mr Solana!

Congrats: you just came across the simple fact why "IP" and its patenting is
fundamentally flawed by design.

You, as a second inventor, cannot know your brand new black box violates in
fact some patent buried in tons of paper in some patent office 10.000 miles
from your home. And as you are not rich, you do not even have a chance to ever
find out, up to the day you get sued by the the holder of that patent for
infringement.

If you think longer about it you may notice that _knowledge_ is a fundamental
part of life for human beings. During evolution only the fittest survived, in
case of fish the ones that can swim fast, or cannot be seen on the ground or
whatever made them special. In case of human race it is knowledge, the
individuals with best trained brain survived, this is why the brain of this
species is as big as it is.
And now some idiots invented "IP". So they in fact try to cut you off from the
very basics of your human nature: knowledge. If you cannot pay, you get none.
point.
Have you ever thought if there is a group of hardliner sharks under water that
tries to cut off the rest of the fish from the water to gain royalties
(whatever it may be you can pay a shark)? Would you call that sharks' idea
stupid? Yes, you would. Would you think the vast majority of fish would (and
should) unite to do just about anything to erase these sharks from the water
planet? Sure you would. See? Politics is sometimes just like swimming, if you
don't move, you drown.

Additionally, this is why you have trousers on, because if there were a
fundamental patent on the invention of trousers you can be sure just about 10%
of the worlds people could afford them - why should the patent holder sell
something so cheap everybody can afford it? He wouldn't, he would maximize his
profit - of course.


Regards,
Stephan