On Tue, 2007-08-14 at 09:18 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > Michael, > > > Since SCO had no right to enter into the deal, and had no authority to > > assign rights, wouldn't that essentially invalidate the deal -and therefore > > leave Sun as vulnerable as they were before the made that agreement -maybe > > even more so now that they've distributed code that they potentially may > > not even have the rights to? > > Actually, that's incorrect. SCOG *did* have rights to resell SysV under > license from Novell, and as far as Novell is concerned that's what happened > with the Sun deal. That's why Novell is currently suing SCOG to collect the > revenue-sharing fees due them from what we paid the SCOG. Even if they don't > collect (likely), that doesn't invalidate our license, since we paid for it > under the correct agreements. > > Also, I've been told by people who where involved that all we were paying for > from SCOG was drivers, not core code. > > IANAL, but apparently I'm better informed than the average press blogger. ;-)
Side note, $14million seems an awful lot for just some drivers. Matthew _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
