SCO laying an ambush for the GPL?

[Nick Kew]

Ref: SCO Reply Memorandum Re Discovery - published at Groklaw

The issue now seems to be "IBM has improperly contributed its own code to
Linux in violation of a contract". Since it is not in dispute that IBM has
contributed code to Linux, that would seem to boil down to an argument over
whether SCO has rights over any or all of that code on the grounds of being
a derivative work.

Now if I find my GPL code distributed with the copyright removed,
I know there's a violation. And that applies also to derivative works
under the GPL. So if I *suspect* violation I may need discovery to
determine whether it is a derivative work under the GPL.

The direction this is going seems likely to set a precedent that will be
cited in any major GPL trial under US law. So if SCO isn't granted all
the discovery it's asked for, that'll be a useful precedent for, say,
M$ to deny discovery when someone accuses them of GPL violation.

-- 
Nick Kew