Posted 8:35 AM

Machiavelli would be proud

In a curiously worded press release, Novell challenges SCO's position while voicing support for Linux. According to the release, "...the 1995 agreement governing SCO's purchase of UNIX from Novell does not convey to SCO the associated copyrights." This line, from a letter written by Novell CEO Jack Messman to SCO CEO Darl MacBride (former good buddies, I might add) implies that there must have been some really odd language to the agreement. How can you sell all of the assets without also transferring the copyright?

One way would be to focus on the term "transfer". While all rights to the Unix code may have been sold, it could be that Novell simply dragged its feet on executing the required documents for the Library of Congress and the U.S. Patent Office to bring about the change in ownership on their books. This in no way would negate SCO's claim, but would most likely be seen as an act of bad faith by a court.

This may also be a red herring. As SCO was quick to point out, "SCO's lawsuit against IBM does not involve patents or copyrights. SCO's complaint specifically alleges breach of contract..."

In next week's Wired Windows column, I outline the possibility that Novell might be behind the SCO initiative. This mini-flap doesn't change that perspective. In fact, it may give Messman the opening he needs to make a "good faith" offer to re-purchase the assets from SCO...