Re: [ox-en] Impaired - is it SCO? preliminary thoughts.
- From: Martin Hardie <auskadi tvcabo.co.mz>
- Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 09:23:46 +0200
Felix
I am not too sure about this.
On Sunday 26 October 2003 15:27, Felix Stalder wrote:
Until the SCO shows the code it claims infringement on,
the claim is factually baseless
SCO say they own the System V (is that the one) UNIX that they go from Novell.
Much of the anti SCo stuff is based upon a confusion of legal terms and ideas
(it is anti FUD and as such not much more helpful than FUD) but the details
will all come out in the evidence. But at this stage they dont have to allege
much more than that. Discovery which is ongoing now will tell us more.
But there is more behind this as you suggest . How much and for what ends are
becoming murkier. Why is Msoft putting money in.
I also think that given the right court (ie right for them) they will be able
to be the David fighting the IBM Goliath. This will all go down well in anti
competitive circles. Other things that worry me are the claims that OS is
anti competition. This could all be picked up by the "right" judge(s). I
don't think OS will find many friends in the Rhenquist Court - I could think
of two maybe but they will be a minority based upon the way he court
operates.
I am not convinced that old rules have much to do with law nowadays. What is
important (and partly what I was trying to get too in my UF paper which I am
rewriting) is that the logic of capital is maintained. Nothing more. So I can
see an anti OS ruling as a possibility. No matter how ludicrous we see the
the claim(s) by SCO.
But having said all that maybe what my little note makes clear to me now is
that the rhetoric of the OSI PP is not based in LAW but in a hackers idea of
what the law should be. In fact their references to what they seem to think
law is is much more about peer (to peer) ethics than law.
This fits in nicely with what i am trying to develop - ways to reimagine law
in this context.
Thanks
Martin
--
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
"Mind you, I am not asking you to bear witness to what you believe false,
which would be a sin, but to testify falsely to what you believe true - which
is a virtuous act because it compensates for lack of proof of something that
certainly exists or happened."
Bishop Otto to Baudolino
_______________________
http://www.oekonux.org/