Re: Linux v2.6.9 and GPL Buyout
From: Jeff V. Merkey
Date: Fri Oct 22 2004 - 19:49:26 EST
Jon Masters wrote:
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 16:58:54 -0600, Jeff V. Merkey <jmerkey@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Jon Masters wrote:
Jeff,
Could you please digitally sign this mail that you are planning to
send or otherwise provide notorisation that confirms you definately
mean this?
I'd love for you to accept liability for this so we can pass all SCO
enquiries on to you.
Jon.
Yes. I can do even better.
Ok. But I need you to sign this using some recognised signature -
other folks can suggest mechanisms we can use that are legally valid.
I'm happy to act as a gobetween if we could get you to undertake to
accept liability for any infringing code left in the kernel after any
proven SCO demands were to be met (I'm sure other folks can see where
I'm going with this discussion - let's see what the response is).
I would agree to this. I will meet with SCO Monday and see if they will
accept this as a proposal. I think
they probably will.
I met with Darl McBride this afternoon
Did you have tea and crumpets? Jam?
They gave me raw carrots (in a plastic bag on Blake's desk) and Baby
Ruth candy bars. We met in
Blake's office (The PR Guy). They had their corporate counsel sitting in
another room and I guess he was
listenting in or something, but he never entered the room. We talked
about the Novell/Bill Mason/Pamela Jones/Groklaw
connections (all of these people are ex Novell employees). I was met at
the front door door by Joan (Darl's
admin) and Blake, then Darl came into the Blakes office. They typed a
letter first roasting GrokLaw then the
SCO general counsel said not to sign it even though Darl wanted him to,
and they said to have Blake put out
some sort of release instead. Then Darl and I talked about all the Linux
code for about an hour or so.
He gave me the first list, and I am waiting on the second
Like I said, if you could provide this to me with legally valid,
documented proof that you'll accept liability for further infringement
then that would help greatly with this thread.
Yes. I am waiting for them to send it. I called Joan and Darl after I
sent this and Darl had left for the day
and Joan called him on his cell phone and I am supposed to talk to Blake
on Monday.
I don't think he likes Linux much
That surprises me. I thought Darl loved Linux more than life itself -
thanks for the correction.
I will have it probably Monday. I'll post it then.
If you mail it to me at: jcm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx along with some contact
details then I can arrange to have you mail me a signed declaration
accepting liability.
Agreed. I will do so. I think SCO just wants their stuff our of Linux.
We should accomodate them.
Who wants to use this stuff besides IBM anyway.
Darl seemed like a nice enough sort
I'd love to interview the guy, if he were interested.
I could ask him...
We argued for 30 minutes about SMP support in Linux and I think
he will just let this one go since I pointed out that Novell had
disclosed the Unixware SMP stuff at Brainshare and he
cannot claim it as trade secrete any longer.
That's interesting. Can you commit to that too in your declaration please?
Yes.
and he would claim any contribution from any IBM employee in Linux.
Were there any restrictions upon when that person was an employee?
Yes. He said any employee who had access to their source code and who
fell under the license agreements. It was
somewhat nebulous, and form the way he explained it, the agreements with
IBM pretty much covered all employees
everywhere. There was some sort of non-compete clause so I think this
affects everyone.
I will post to kernel.org the complete listing.
Thanks. I look forward to reading that.
You got it.
Jeff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/