eWEEK content and product recommendations are editorially independent. We may make money when you click on links to our partners. Learn More.
You have to give The SCO Group Inc. credit for persistence, if nothing else. Even after Magistrate Judge Brooke Wells strongly dismissed the majority of the companys claims that IBM had contributed Unix code to Linux, SCO keeps on fighting.
In its latest move, the Unix company filed an expected appeal to Judge Wells ruling.
According to SCOs corporate communications manager, Blake Stowell, SCOs “Objections to Order Granting in part IBMs Motion to Limit SCOs Claims” makes several points.
First, “SCO copyright claims… do not involve methods and concepts. The copyright claims concern literal and non-literal copying and the disclosure of methods and concepts constitutes a breach of contract.”
Therefore, “SCO is essentially being sanctioned here for not having deduced the source code that IBM developers had in mind when they disclosed a method and concept without using source code, but expressly stated that the contribution came from Dynix or another UNIX derivative system.”
SCO is also claiming that “There is no basis… for the Magistrate Judges conclusion that SCO willfully … refused to provide the source code information IBM contends it was obligated to provide. To the contrary, the record evidence shows that SCO provided all the identifying information it had…”
Since its exactly this point that Judge Wells hammered on over and over again, its hard to see what SCO is getting at here. Nevertheless, SCO requested of the court, and is still requesting in its objection, that an evidentiary hearing take place where the court can consider “on an item-by-item basis the specificity of the disclosures made” by SCO.