From: "Paul Ranson" 

Relax and think it through. The hysterical response you demonstrate (and
which is naturally denied as a phenomenon by Joe...) isn't helpful.

The complaint is that IBM/Others have put code derived from SCO owned
material into Linux. What you describe is exactly that process.

Remember all the effort to clean room the PC BIOS so that clones would be
unencumbered? Do you think that Paul McKenney operated in a clean room
environment wrt Unix code?

Paul

"Adam Flinton"  wrote in message
news:3eeeeb71{at}w3.nls.net...
> "SCO also detailed one element of technology that it asserts IBM copied,
> the Remote Copy Update (RCU) system, for relieving some memory
> bottlenecks on multiprocessor servers.
>
> The amended complaint includes an IBM copyright on the RCU technology
> that names the an engineer as the author, with work "based on a
> Dynix/ptx implementation by Paul Mckenney (sic)." Dynix/ptx was
> Sequent's version of Unix for servers with multiple Intel processors.
>
> It appears that RCU indeed stems from work in Dynix/ptx. In a paper on
> his Web site, IBM's Paul McKenney says RCU was included in Dynix/ptx in
> 1994. And the Linux Scalability Effort's Web site says that RCU patches
> are "based on original DYNIX/ptx code (released by IBM under
GPL)"--the
> GPL referring to the General Public License that covers Linux. Torvalds
> accepted RCU into the Linux kernel in October 2002. "
>
> So now SCO is claiming code it didn't write? Hey maybe I can lodge a
> claim against MS claiming that I should get paid for code they
> write....hey I could be onto a winner....
>
> Quick where's my lawyer.....
>
> Adam
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4