Linux community told to 'get real'

[KennyR]

Ok, we're all fed up of the SCO thing. But interestingly, now the non-IT media are picking up the story in more detail.

In this article, a writer for the BBC scolds the Linux community for attacking SCO for defending its own copyright, regardless of Linux's moral superiority. Note that this hasn't necessarily got to do with SCO's claims being true or false.

Those wishing to comment can even send their comments to the BBC.

[KennyR]

Experience shows the BBC have no agenda - and that's because they're supported by the taxpayer. They have no reason to lie because no lie would be profitable anyway, unlike private owned news agencies like Fox and CNN.

And attacking the BBC isn't going to get Linux users off the hook. What they are saying is quite valid - that the Linux community howl in anger even at the very mention of copyright.

[KennyR]

mikeymike wrote:
Hmm, the author of the article seems to be missing the point. The Linux community (the non-zealot part of it anyway) doesn't like SCO because it, largely directed by MS, is trying to destroy MS's main competition.

And rightly so. But this wasn't the point of the article. ;-)

Look at this quote:

Unfortunately, the typical response of a Linux user to SCO's claims has been to dismiss them. They criticise SCO for even hinting that Linux could be anything other than perfectly legal and clean, and support actions such as the recent denial of service attack on the SCO website.

 Since the GPL relies on copyright law for its legal strength, it seems unwise for the Linux world to argue - as some have - that SCO should be destroyed for daring to protect its own copyright.

Instead, the developers and the team in charge of the Linux kernel should think about how they ensure that they really are respecting other people's copyrights when they accept contributions.

[KennyR]

The BBC were not biased on the Iraq war. There was a point where only the BBC and Al-Jazeera were sites you could go to to avoid US government spin. Al-Jazeera were biased the other way of course, but the BBC were impartial as ever. Their criticism of Blair for the lies he told the British people is just a reflection of our own anger towards Blair for those lies.

[KennyR]

It's quiet evident that the BBC has agendas, else they would not have been kicked off atleast one HMS ship during Operation Iraqi Freedom because of their bias reporting that annoyed that ship's crew.

Not biased enough, more like. Not enough flag waving.

As far as their coverage of Linux vs SCO, who cares? This is not a battle of public opinion but a court battle between different corporations. SCO wants IBM to buy them out, IBM has other ideas on the situation.

Correct, but Linux has a talent for making itself powerful corporate enemies thanks to its contempt of copyright. And as you and I both know, the dollar rules the US corporate courts. Microsoft's untouchability is testament to that. Even with a seemingly watertight case against SCO, Linux may still find itself up creek.c without a makefile.

[KennyR]

The BBC were not biased on the Iraq war.

You got to be jokinfg they were very biased :-?

Example please.