In Exhibit 424: “Transcript of August 5, 2003 Conference Call, titled ‘The SCO Group Conference Call to Comment and Provide Q&A on Recent Red Hat Actions’”, on p.4 (p.6 in PDF), The SCO Group responds to a question from CNET's David Becker about Linux licensing:

Operator
Thank you. Now we'll hear from David Becker with CNET.

David Becker — CNET — Analyst
Hi, can you talk to me about the terms of the renewal of license pricing and how one would go about acquiring that?

Darl McBride — The SCO Group Inc — Presidant and CEO
Sure. Chris, you want to give some detail on the announcement we made today on the licensing side.

Christopher Sontag — The SCO Group Inc — Senior VP and GM
Sure. The pricing initially for a single CPU commercial use Linux 2.4 or above is $699 for an introductory price that will be good until October 15 after which it will climb to a higher price. We have decided to provide an introductory pricing to allow people to more readily purchase that intellectual property license from SCO to continue on with their business unaffected. The means by which they can obtain that license is to contact their SCO representative and they will place them in contact with appropriate people in my organization to set up appointments to facilitate the purchase of those licenses.

(md5: 914b56daab56b319dc4094285c933661 IBM-835-Exhibit_424.pdf)
(Groklaw alternate transcript)

But, in 31, The SCO Group, through its attorneys, claims that The SCO Group has not “sought” nor “attempted&rdquoo; to sell licenses for Linux. Isn't that claim simply frivolous in light of Mr. Sontag's remarks during the August 5, 2003 conference call?

Or are The SCO Group's attorneys attempting a bold defense strategy against IBM's claim of copyright infringement? Are their attorneys claiming that it's not copyright infringement because Mr. Sontag made a false statement on behalf of The SCO Group during this conference call?