From: "Paul Ranson" 

I don't see why the 'developer' feels the need for anonymity.

But isn't this pleasingly circular? SCO didn't give permission for their
code to be distributed under the GPL, so they take legal steps and become
pariahs. Anonymous coder didn't give permission for his code to be
distributed alongside said stolen code, so he claims a copyright
infringement. And his copyright claim can be against every distributor of
Linux, since he has tacitly accepted that SCO have a case!

I think the 'Linux Movement' is playing this one really, really badly. But
it's great to watch from my BSD5.1 seat.

Paul

"Mike '/m'"  wrote in message
news:unnpev0m0v4bt3ne4jvo7vkjkbjvfq0dks{at}4ax.com...
>
> http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=10018
>
> ===
> SCO, THAT PARIAH of the IT industry, has received what might turn out to
> be legally damaging return fire from a Linux kernel developer. An email
> presenting SCO with formal notice alleging copyright infringement was
> sent to the firm this weekend. The email to SCO is reproduced below.
>
> It's perhaps worth noting in passing that over 400 individuals worldwide
> are credited as authors who have added significant contributions to the
> Linux kernel, and thousands of others have also contributed kernel code.
> All of these Linux kernel developers have the right to transmit similar
> demands to SCO, and possibly pursue lawsuits, as this email suggests....
> ===
>
>   /m

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