[olug] I'm one of the nails in SCO coffin...

[Luke -Jr]

On Thursday 23 August 2007, Daniel Pfile wrote:
> I think I'm wrong on the infringement part, since the person who got the
> code would just get the default copyright license and not be able to
> copy it. However, they wouldn't be bound to the same license/nda that
> ibm was since they received the code without a restriction. You'd still
> have all the rights normal copyright law/fair use grants you.

Right.

> > This is not like the GPL where the license is granted to anyone and
> > everyone. *Only* IBM has this license, and if the code were made
> > available without restriction, this clause would permit *only* IBM to
> > disclose it.
> >
> > Of course, for the code to be available to the public "without
> > restriction" also implies there is no longer a restriction to not
> > disclose it in general... But that has not happened either.
>
> Right, IBM was the target of the lawsuit.

My point is that it does not help IBM at all since the code was never 
available to the public *without restriction*.