There are many great features available to you once you register at Neowin, including:

  • Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the front page
  • Access to a great community, with a massive database of experience on hard & software issues, gaming and recreational activities, and more
  • Access to the Neowin IRC - you could make a friend from across the world and talk to them live
  • Access to Neowin contests & subscription offers and forums that are not open to guests/li>
  • It's simple, and FREE! · Register here

Why Is Not SCO going after APPLE for UNIX usage?


 Share

Recommended Posts

From all my little knowdledge, i gather Apples OSX(1,2,3.,..8,9) is a improved derivation of DARWIN Unix. If that is true, isnt there SCO's SystemV code in it ? Did Steve removed it from OSX (7,8,9..)? :ninja:

If the alleged SCO code is there in Apple's Software; :blush: will SCO go after APPLE? or does it fears the power of designers,girls and the creative mind? :whistle:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure that the SCO is just going after IBM and Linux. They have nothing on Apple, and if they were to go after them, they would be fighting on too many fronts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sco has stolen code from bsd and claimed it as their own. but they still had the © notice :p

SCO code is really legacy and no one uses it anymore. The biggest thing is that they probably stole the code.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, in SCO's eyes Linux code contains stolen UNIX code.

Apples OSX core is based on NextStep UNIX, as used on the Next platform some years back. That was a legal & licensed deriritive of UNIX that Apple picked up when it purchased what was left of Next. So as far as I can tell, Apple are free from SCO and its BS lawsuits.

But quite frankly we all know SCO are full of 5h1t.. I can't wait to see them get roasted in court. And from what has been dug up already, it looks like SCO are rapidly losing footing on what was already a pretty shaky argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, in SCO's eyes Linux code contains stolen UNIX code.

Apples OSX core is based on NextStep UNIX, as used on the Next platform some years back. That was a legal & licensed deriritive of UNIX that Apple picked up when it purchased what was left of Next. So as far as I can tell, Apple are free from SCO and its BS lawsuits.

But quite frankly we all know SCO are full of 5h1t.. I can't wait to see them get roasted in court. And from what has been dug up already, it looks like SCO are rapidly losing footing on what was already a pretty shaky argument.

Darwin is part Mach microkernel and standard BSD, not Next. ;)

For the most part, the heart of SCO's arguments lies in unix/linux distributions based on the System V Unix codebase, which SCO supposedly bought from Novell after they had it for a while.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SCO beat up my dad and took advantage of my mom. The RIAA was there, but they only video taped SCO doing it's dirty deeds. :no: :cry:

ha ha thats the funniest thing I have heard in a long time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't SCO hint that they might go after BSD?

I don't see why they would have a reason to... BSD was built much differently and much more efficiently than the System V code ever was. They may have come from some base Unix code but the two are very different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all there is absolutely no evidence that there is any SCO code in linux.

Next even if there was SCO code in linux -- let's say The Linus copied the whole unix shebang in there -- even so SCO lost all legs to stand on when they distributed linux themselves under the GPL (in essence giving away any rights to what was inside).

Now, BSD. SCO has in fact hinted they will try and shakedown BSD users as well (perhaps try and unsettle the settlement between AT&T and Berkeley).

Well they have even less of a foot to stand on here since they (SCO) bought the Unix stuff in 95 while in 94 the Unix-Berkeley lawsuit was settled giving BSD their rights.

Now SCO's motives are obvious -- they are pettty thieves who will in all likelihood be tossed in prison by this time next year.

Will they go after Apple in 04?

It wouldn't surprise me but wouldn't really make sense except to give symmetry to their claims. And it wouldn't make sense for Microsoft (the primary SCO backer) who presumably are bankrolling SCO in order to raise the price of linux through legal costs. Now Apple's OS is expensive and proprietary already so no point as far as Microsoft is concerned.

And since v. few businesses use OS X and since SCO execs want to cash out as much as possible without spending every last $ on lawyers they probably don't want to be suing Apple either tho again they may make similar grandstanding claims to what they've done elsewhere.

Of course the great irony is this will probably turn out to be exactly what the linux community needed. A wake up call and some legal teeth cutting for the guys that just wanted to be left alone and program . That and a big coming victory that will give corporate customers more confidence in linux and GPL. Next time someone makes these sorts of claims, they can just say "remember SCO?".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Himosan very nicely put :pats U:.

And since v. few businesses use OS X and since SCO execs want to cash out as much as possible without spending every last $ on lawyers they probably don't want to be suing Apple either tho again they may make similar grandstanding claims to what they've done elsewhere.
GOOD POINT . i think now Apple is safe then, but i have read somewhere, OSX is trying to become a fast vaible Server OS on maclash or somewhere, also G5 has given lot of legs for OSx to run if it wants to.
  That and a big coming victory that will give corporate customers more confidence in linux and GPL. Next time someone makes these sorts of claims, they can just say "remember SCO?".

Yea , all this makes me think SCO (in a sense Microsoft) will boost Linux popularity among corporate/enterprise users; if IBM+OSDl+trovalds manage to trounce SCO. But this should happen soon as possible if linux hopes to reap this benefits , otherwise companies are already thinking whether to turn to MS to get out of this babble due to SCO spamming them for IP money.

First of all there is absolutely no evidence that there is any SCO code in linux.

I wish that is cleared out in the court as soon as possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What surprises me is the slow reaction from IBM in not seeking a prelim injuction. One was granted in Germany a long time ago and SCO shut the hell up and closed their german website showing how much they really had to put on the table.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Darwin is part Mach microkernel and standard BSD, not Next. ;)

For the most part, the heart of SCO's arguments lies in unix/linux distributions based on the System V Unix codebase, which SCO supposedly bought from Novell after they had it for a while.

Darwin (and thus OS X) IS derived from NeXT (by the way, that is the correct way to write it). Look into the history of it sometime.

Basically, it is as follows:

1. Steve Jobs leaves Apple and founds NeXT

2. much later, Steve returns to Apple, around the same time, Apple buys what remained of NeXT

3. Apple starts work on Rhapsody(based on NeXT code), which was originally going to be released for both Macs and x86 (x86 support was dropped after Developer Release 2).

4. Apple releases OS X Server 1.0 (which is very similar to Rhapsody, OS8 style Mac GUI) for Macs only.

5. Apple releases OS X 10.0 (the client version) which is still based on the same code base (now with the Aqua GUI).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What surprises me is the slow reaction from IBM in not seeking a prelim injuction. One was granted in Germany a long time ago and SCO shut the hell up and closed their german website showing how much they really had to put on the table.

Unfortunately the courts in the US don't work the same way as the courts in Germany. You can read all about the status of the court case at Groklaw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see why they would have a reason to... BSD was built much differently and much more efficiently than the System V code ever was. They may have come from some base Unix code but the two are very different.

The exact same thing could also be said for Linux.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately the courts in the US don't work the same way as the courts in Germany.

Well I don't recall thinking they were the same, in any case prelim injuctions are not unheard of in the us, and particularly when someone is making unsubstantiated claims and devaluing your products. And yes I am still surprised IBM hasn't pursued it thus far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.