In response to the May 19 Perspectives column by Bruce Perens, "":
I agree that SCO Group is doing a bad thing. I agree that this will hurt the Linux movement, which I happen to support. But claiming that Microsoft has "involvement" or is "linked" to this is too much of a stretch. Indeed, the deck for your opinion piece is: "Open-source activist Bruce Perens uncovers the SCO-Microsoft connection behind a campaign to convince people that trade secrets of Unix have been copied into Linux."
OK, I'll bite: What dark conspiratorial connection did you uncover? That Microsoft paid licensing fees? What happens when companies that push Linux distributions pony up money? Are they secretly linked to this evil plan?
The only real thing you have to say about Microsoft is at the end: "Microsoft, whose involvement in getting a defeated Unix company to take on the missionary work of spreading FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) about Linux is finally coming to light. "
Maybe it's coming to light for you, but I'm still in the dark. Where's your evidence that Microsoft has "involvement" or is "linked"? I don't think the Linux community is well-served by opinion pieces that play fast and loose with the truth. After all, isn't that what you are claiming Microsoft does?