What, exactly, is SCO implicating?

Ok, so we all know about the SCO issue well enough by now. I have commented on it a number of times in these pages. But what I, as well as others, have failed to clearly point out, is the usual Linux is not GNU/Linux thing.

I often get annoyed by people who take their high horse on this, thinking "just let the punters think it's all Linux - it's easier for them to understand that way". But now that ambiguity is helping SCO.

You see the only code SCO is complaining about is in the kernel. And as we know, the kernel is just on (very important) piece of the puzzle. We can, though, run almost exactly the same set of software on a different kernel - like *BSD, GNU's own Hurd (running on the Mach microkernel), Apple's opensource Darwin kernel or even non-free kernels like Solaris.

So there really is no reason for the Opensource / GNU movement to be affected by these lawsuits - even if the unthinkable happened and SCO actually won a point or two.

Thank's to Richard Stallman for pointing this out on ZDnet (gee, if you coudln't trust Richard Stallman to point this out - what could you trust!)