Novell owns Unix copyrights, not SCO

Novell owns Unix copyrights, not SCO

Summary: The long legal nightmare of open source may be well and truly over.


A jury in Utah has ruled that Novell owns the copyrights to Unix, not SCO.

The response from Groklaw, which made its bones covering the SCO cases, was immediate. "Thank you, Novell, for never giving up, and never giving in. Those of us who love to use Linux will forever be thankful to you."

I spent the afternoon trying to pull more out of Novell as well, and finally got this from a spokesman.

"The jury has confirmed Novell’s ownership of the Unix copyrights, which SCO had asserted to own in its attack on Linux. An adverse decision would have had profound implications for the Linux community.

"We own the copyrights and we will continue to protect the open source community, including Linux."

SCO trustee Edward Cahn immediately sent out a release saying the company would "fight on" against IBM, "based on contracts," but it's hard to see how far the company can go without resources.

I know some snarky comments will immediately come by saying, "what? Novell protects the open source community? What about its agreement with Microsoft yadda-yadda-yadda?"

I think the more important point in all this is that Linux is out of court, and that whatever the merits of Microsoft's patent claims on Linux technology it's not dragging Linux back into court.

Any cloud overhanging use of Linux should now be clearly gone. Novell owns the copyrights. Its agreement with Microsoft is binding regarding patent claims should anyone choose to sign it. Those who don't are not cowering in fear, either.

The long legal nightmare of open source may be well and truly over.

Feel free to disagree.

Topics: Open Source, Operating Systems, Software

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.


Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Who ever thought SCO had a case anyway?

    Too bad it's taken us 7 years to get here, but better late than never.
    • I'll tell you who...

      Maureen O'Gara, Rudy De Hass (Paul Murphy), "Don Rupert/Bit Byte/No Axe To Grind", Rob Enderle, Laura "Didiot", Daniel Lyons (Fake Steve Jobs), some employees at Microsoft and SUN Microsystems, and the list goes on and on.
      • I have a small confession to make...

        I preserved a link to [i]someone[/i] (no names *cough*) making these comments waaay back in 2006:

        [i]"[T]he bottom line here is that when you blow away all the smoke and mirrors generated by the lawyers, SCO does have a reasonable claim over the core issues of IBM "leaking" Unix code to Linux. And like you, if it ever does get in front of a judge/jury IBM is going to lose."[/i]

        [i]"I say SCO has a case.

        You disgree.

        Now as I said before, you are not going to change your mind nor am I and we have to wait and see what the courts do.

        See how simple that is?"[/i]

        I [i]knew[/i] it would come in handy ;-). Now, how is "IBM going to lose" when SCO doesn't have standing in the first place?
        • LOL! Was that from NoAxe?

          • Like I said: no names.

            I'm trying to salvage a [i]crumb[/i] of magnanimity... ;-).
          • More like the nutty Non-Zealot

            Good to know there are people here that save those juicy bits of info. I
            do recall all the arguments over that case. Boy were all the Microsoft
            Fanboys jumping all over Linux. So much for that. Now if we can only get
            that fake butt, Steve Ballmer to state what are the infringing parts of
            Linux, that fat boy continues to claim against Linux. If it were me, I'd take
            that fat bastard to court for spreading lies, & to have the court force his
            hand to see what is really going on. I said it before, & I will say it again.
            MSFT, & Ballmer are full of *hit
          • You are the nutty one

            I like Linux. I've used Linux for years.

            It is you nutty Linux zealots that I mock.

            Linux though? Fantastic OS. Almost as good as
            Windows 7. :)
          • The one and only

            No facts strikes again!

      • Why do you think Don Rupert and No Ax are the same

        Rudy De Hass being Paul Murphy ok on that.

        But No Ax being Don W. Rupert. Do you have any evidence?

        Just curious. Do you know who I am :)
    • I have quite a few names.

      Loverock Davidson

      The nutty Non-Zealot

      No Ax To Grind

      and a few others. They were always telling me and many others here that
      they could interpret the future by looking into their crystal balls.

        I'm the first name on his list! Tell me that ain't love :)
        Loverock Davidson
        • Loverock, maybe like SCO you'll just disapear into the woodwork

          ..... or is that to much to expect :-)
          Over and Out
          • It

            is too much to ask.

            He is impervious to logical, reasonable, evidence based, sane debate.

            Still, we can keep dreaming.
            Viva la crank dodo
    • RE: Novell owns Unix copyrights, not SCO

      Novell owns the copyrights. Its agreement with Microsoft is binding regarding patent claims should anyone choose to sign it. Those who dont are not cowering in fear, either.<a href=""><font color="LightGrey"> k</font></a>
  • RE: Novell owns Unix copyrights, not SCO

    SCO was once a fine company with fine products and fine support. But that was back before current crop of trustees/former board took over.
    Good illustration for business classes on "how to destroy your core business by chasing fantasies."
    • RE: Novell owns Unix copyrights, not SCO

      Sorta what like Steve Ballmer, & MSFT have been doing for years. Chasing
  • Novell owns Unix

    What does this exactly mean for Novell's version of Linux, or Linux in general?

    Maybe I just don't get this whole situation, but aren't they supposed to be two separate things? I mean, what happens if Novell decides to discontinue [Open]SUSE and just release a new Unix version (System VI)? Is it really going to have any bearing on Linux at all? I thought the whole reason why the GPL was designed was to distance Linux from Unix.
    • So you haven't been following...

      The UNIX copyrights were the cornerstone for SCO's plans to sue Linux users. (Specifically, they had claimed but chosen not to prove that UNIX had been copied into Linux.) But without the UNIX copyrights, SCO has no standing to accuse anyone of anything.

      Oh dear.
    • All the SCO v Linux back-story you can eat... available at .
    • My question is:

      What's stopping Novell from pulling SUSE from the market and doing the same thing as SCO?

      The FSF already has a "Boycott Novell" campaign, so what's stopping Novell from getting even?