From: brian at english-bay.com (Brian)
Date: Fri Oct  1 14:00:29 2004
Subject: Deposition of Otis L. Wilson...
Message-ID: <Mfj7d.562046$M95.65275@pd7tw1no>

Hello Dear Friends:

Just in case you were wondering, Otis L. Wilson was the man at AT&T that was
responsible for the licensing of software products including Unix SysV.

Here he is being deposed by Mr. Marriot (IBM lawyer who had SCO for lunch
the other day). The SCO lawyer attending is Mr. Gant - all he seems to do
is make endless objections throughout the Q&A.

I have gone through and picked out my favorite passage.

<quote>
BY MR. MARRIOTT: 

        Q. In the next sentence in paragraph 27 you indicated that, "We
never intended to assert ownership or control over any portion of a
modification or derivative work that was not part of the original UNIX
System V source code provided by AT&T or USL.

        "The licensee was free to use, copy, distribute or disclose its
modifications and derivative works, provided that it did not use, copy,
distribute or disclose any portions of the original UNIX System V source
code provided by AT&T or USL, except as permitted by the license
agreements."

        You say, Mr. Wilson, there that you never intended to assert such
ownership or control. Why is that, sir?

        MR. GANT: Same objections.

        THE WITNESS: That -- that just was not .. our intent. We did not --
we did not want ownership in any product that was created by or for our
licensees. We only wanted to protect the underlying software product
provided under the licensing agreement.
</quote>

Wow - talk about 'merits of the case'.

Here is the best part, SCO has to argue that Mr. Wilson, who was in charge
of AT&T's licensing of software for over 10 years, is MISTAKEN about the
contracts he administered and that SCO's interpretations are correct.

Bwahahahahahahahahahahaha...

Who thinks SCO is going to win THAT argument?

Now, of course, it is time for 'Tony the Tube Steak' to chime in about
'anything can happen' which isn't in dispute and 'merits of the case' of
which he has absolutely no clue.

Incidently, 'Tony the Tube Steak' got over 5,000 hits on Google SO I must be
onto something - by Tony the Tube Steak's logic.

Now, I would invite anyone to argue or debate the charges and the case BUT
please don't tell me not to post here - my posts are on topic for
comp.unix.sco.misc, even if you don't like it.

OK Tony - bring it on...

"blah blah blah SCO could win... blah blah blah Merits of the case... blah
blah blah Visit my website... blah blah blah nonsense about Google
searchs."

8^)

Brian