-=PCTechTalk=- Re: Linux
- From: "BashfulBob" <BashfulBob@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: pctechtalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 20:48:43 -0500
Hi
See below
Life is what happens in between plans.
Virus free email by Norton's
This message is intended for the sole use of the individual and/or entity to
which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are
not the addressee, or authorized to receive this on behalf of the addressee,
you are hereby notified that you may not use, copy, disclose, or distribute
to anyone this message or any part thereof. If you have received this in
error, please immediately advise the sender by e-mail and delete this
information. Thank you
----- Original Message -----
From: "cris" <cris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> I'm sure I recycled my newspaper with the article in it -
> It had to do with Unix, I believe, and said that even tho Unix owned Linux
(or code or something) ....... Is linix really Unix's code perhaps?
Response:
Unix and Linux are different operating systems and not owned by the same
entity. (For all intense and purposes, there are alike.) If it was owned by
the same entity, it seems to me that there could be no lawsuit. Doesn't make
sense for one company to sue itself for its stealing its parent, child
companies stuff. I would agree that someone might get fired by I don't think
a law suit would be possible or economically in the best interest of the
company. But I have been wrong before. :-)
Linux Torvalds, the Finnish programmer, is the guy that wrote Linux and put
it into public domain. If anyone owns Linux, this is the guy. (This is what
I have been taught at Purdue). It is my understanding that Torvalds wrote
the initial base core and put it out on the net and ask for peoples input
for enhancing it, expanding it and writing additional features for it, with
the understanding that anything contributed would be in public domain. He
got it and through the years and with this same idea, we have the Linux of
today.
The suit (if I understand the article correctly) is against IBM, not Linux
(How can you sue the public?), for allegedly stealing code and writing
something that became part of Linux under the stipulations of Linux
agreement. If that is true, and the suit verdict goes against IBM, then I
could see the possibility that stuff that IBM wrote would have to be
removed, but I do not think it will end Linux. It is true that IBM is a
heavy weight in the preparatory area of computing, BUT (again) to write
stuff for (and/or using Linux source code) takes it out to the private
sector by the terms and conditions of the Linux license and I am sure IBM
knows this. At least that is my understanding. If I am incorrect here,
please let me know the why's and wherefores.
The company is battling big bucks and I don't think they have as deep
pockets as the others.
end of response.
To unsub or change your email settings:
//www.freelists.org/webpage/pctechtalk
To access our Archives:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PCTechTalk/messages/
//www.freelists.org/archives/pctechtalk/
For more info:
//www.freelists.org/cgi-bin/list?list_id=pctechtalk
Other related posts:
