Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Intellectual Property Law Blogs -> Groklaw

Intellectual Property Law

: Groklaw

Questions About the Linux Kernel Personality (LKP) and the GPL

By Pamela Jones et al.

I've been thinking about something. And I can't figure out the answer. Remember when SCO's Erik Hughes was deposed [PDF; text] in the SCO v. IBM litigation, he said that at first the LKP did have kernel code in it, but later it was taken out? So then why, when SCO announced it was stopping distribution of Linux in May of 2003, would it have needed to stop distributing the LKP also? Presumably by then, according to what they've told us, there was no Linux kernel code in the LKP. So why did SCO stop distributing? I know one can never rule out the Keystone Kops syndrome, but I keep trying to puzzle out their thinking.

And then I have another question: if there ever was kernel code in the LKP, was kernel source distributed as required by the GPL license? The reason I keep thinking about it is this: if they failed to distribute the source, did they lose their GPL license? Under GPLv2, if you breach the terms, termination is automatic and can't be restored except by permission of the authors of the copyrighted code.

Now *there's* a picture my mind doesn't mind dwelling on.

Full post as published by Groklaw on April 06, 2009 (boomark / email).