SCO Expands Licensing Money Chase Worldwide 466
drizst 'n drat writes "Article posted recently on ZDNet that 'companies outside the United States that use Linux now face the threat of legal action from the SCO Group, following the announcement on Wednesday that SCO's licenses are available worldwide.'" And cbiltcliffe writes "Vnunet is reporting that SCO is now threatening legal action against UK businesses that run Linux.
Yet again, they claim they're going to initiate legal action against Linux users 'within a couple of weeks.' (Funny...weren't they saying that back in September?)
They also claim that Novell and HP indemnification schemes are essentially useless (similar to SCO's Linux licences).
It definitely appears the media is getting somewhat wiser to the FUD, however, as the story reports 'The run-time licence only permits use of what SCO says is its IP,' rather than 'The licence permits use of SCO's IP' like we would have heard a couple of months ago."
Correct me if I'm wrong (Score:1, Interesting)
If there is a ruling in the US against SCO... (Score:5, Interesting)
Barratry.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Goodness! The temerity! (Score:2, Interesting)
Especially since this can get you jail time in other countries, perhaps..?
Another day, another SCO story... (Score:5, Interesting)
Translation: we're not making enough cash from North America because they're not taking us seriously. So, we'll hit you guys up for a few bucks.
I really wonder if anybody in Europe will really take these guys seriously? Since SCO was sooooooooo successful in launching their lawsuits in the U.S., I'm sure they'll do just fine in Europe.
Europe is more vigilant to Open Source (Score:2, Interesting)
Not news really (Score:2, Interesting)
Well, in reality everyone has the threat of legal action looming over them. It may be entirely unwarranted, as in the SCO fiasco, but you can still go file suit against anyone for pretty much any goofy reason you can come up with.
I'm waiting calmly (Score:3, Interesting)
-3 days left.
(wtf?! -> soon we will know what court and IBM thinks about their 60-paged document...)
Already Happening (Score:5, Interesting)
As our last SCO server went into the trash a couple of years ago legal told us to ignore the letter and that's exactly what we did. Our three AIX machines continue to run as do our two Linux clusters, the only thing that's changed is the FUD from SCO.
Ed Almos
Budapest, Hungary
In Related News (Score:5, Interesting)
The opening act of the finish (Score:5, Interesting)
This whole thing is just starting to piss me off, as they want it both ways, want everyone to lay down and pay them money for just sitting on their asses and thinking about ways to rule the world. They keep making these threats, but with the resulting 60 pages of docs they handed over, it is now being widely assumed that these guys are smoking some of the local meth (Utah has a HUGE meth industry).
One other note is that Sontag backtracked and said that this case is not a copyright case, but a breech of contract case. If that is true (who knows) then the ONLY entity that they could get money out of is IBM. They cannot go after an end-user using a contractual basis for their case, as the end user has no contract with SCO, much less any implied of such. They could go after under the basis of the copyrights, but then any end user could defer the case until after the Novell v. SCO copyright fight is over.
This sounds like a last gasp of desperation from SCO. They had to put out something to pump the stock, and what better way to say they going to get money from the whole world! What they do not realize is, just like a TV show killing off a main character to garner interest, this latest tact will prove to be opening act of their permanent cancellation.
Re:Go Go Super WIPO (Score:2, Interesting)
Thanks for the info (Score:4, Interesting)
In other news, I'll be phoning Trading Standards.
SCO shopping for an easer mark (Score:2, Interesting)
Then SCO can come back to the US and say something like "The evidence was enough to win the trial in Libya, it should be enough evidence to stand in the US."
Gee the stock is (Score:3, Interesting)
SCO Japan (Score:2, Interesting)
I wonder how this SCO(US) move affect Japan.
Re:Barratry.. (Score:2, Interesting)
Actually, I think this is at the judges discretion. There have been libel cases where one side has won, but has been awarded 1p damages and told to pay costs, which is worse than losing!
IANAL; would like an attorney's opinion! (Score:3, Interesting)
And now, from the "demented conspiracy" section of *my* *brain*, comes the following twisted-beyond-repair illogic:
1) SCO has, so far, *threatened* lawsuits against US users, but hasn't actually followed through yet because (I surmise) they know they'll lose.
2) (Lawyer, please!) If SCO files a suit in a US court against an entity who fails to show up to defend themselves (like, say, some dude from the UK where US law does not apply and who, therefore, doesn't give a rat's ass about paying to put high-priced attorneys on a plane to Utah), then SCO wins, right?
------------
3) Therefore, SCO's strategy is to get some quick default wins in court against defendants who won't show up to get some quick PR validation so they can move forward with the sale of the company and assets.
Is this stretching it maybe?
Please copy and distribute prosecute-sco.html (Score:5, Interesting)
-
Let's Put SCO Behind Bars [goingware.com]
From the page: Thank You For Your Attention.Re:Time for more "put up or shut up" (Score:4, Interesting)
What SCO May Be Thinking - A Thought Experiment (Score:5, Interesting)
I assume that we have two sides here. One side says "show us the infringing code".... on the theory that in order to demonstrate copying you have to show more or less a letter perfect copy...
I assume that SCOs game is to get inside of the sausage making process and to demonstrate that even though the code is not literally system V you can trace a "legacy" that involves the gradual modification of ideas expressed in one form to ideas expressed today in Linux, and that by linking the people who worked on code to its evolution over time through evidence derived from the discovery process, they will make the case that current Linux code is derived from code that they claim to own. The continuity of people may be part of making the case of continuity of "ideas" and thus of "ownership."
From this perspective (IANAL, etc.) I would think that all of the moaning about how Linux code isn't exactly, or aproximately, Unix code is really beside the point. IBM would of course like to keep it at that level, arguing "if the glove does not fit you must aquit", eg. if this code isn't exactly the copyrighted code then they have no case.
But my understanding of the law (limited and amateur as it is) is that SCO would have a case to make if the concepts ideas, "manner of expression" and all sorts of other stuff in Linux could be shown to be derived through a chain of modification, backed up by the ongoing involvement of individuals in that modification process, even if the code and expression of programing ideas took a very different letter by letter form.
So if they can get inside of IBM records they can begin to stitch a winnable case together, while if the "Match code or acquit" theory holds then the case is over. So if they can satisfy the initial requests enough to make the judge open up IBM to their SCO discover, then they can begin to make the case.
Anyway that's my effort to understand what SCO might be thinking and why this might make more sense than we'd like it to make.
They are scum, but let's not assume that they are stupid scum.
Re:Novell (Score:5, Interesting)
SCO not only fails to act according to this simple logic, they taunt "more legal action" which just prolongs the course of when their suposed IP would be verifed. So, theoretically after IBM were to lose, they sue their next customer, and the chain would be very slow. You can run concurrently, but I would move that they are all related.
Re:In how many different languages...(Website) (Score:5, Interesting)
From the website [insultmonger.com]:
The UI is a bit overdone, but the data rocks...
Re:SCO are psychotic (Score:3, Interesting)
How can they say that this case is over contract breach w/ IBM and in the same week demand (again) end users license their "IP" (which nobody has seen because, despite a court order, they will not produce it).
It's pretty obvious that they're in a tailspin now.
What I don't understand... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Not the UK (Score:3, Interesting)
While the mainland, especially Germany, has been big on OSS, it seems the UK is more of a Windows shop than the USA is
I disagree; my last two jobs in London (one at Reuters, one at Univ. London) involved significant Linux use. The guy who ported Linux to the ARM architecture (Russell King) is English; I met him one evening when I took my A3020 Archimedes over to his house in a backpack, so he could iron out some bugs in a newly-ported 1.x kernel. And isn't Alan Cox Welsh?
Re:Confidence for Indemnification (Score:5, Interesting)
Indemnification is more like insurance than it is a warranty.
That means if you get sued for using the product, the distributor (or the person issuing the indemnification) will step in to take the bullet for you.
SCO, by virtue of it being a corporation, effectively indemnifies McBride, Stowell, et al. against individual prosecution for the company's misdeeds. There are ways, however, to "pierce the corporate veil" to go after individuals who are directly responsible for a company's misdeeds (as we are at very long last beginning to see with regards to Enron).
Hopefully that clarifies a bit...
Re:If there is a ruling in the US against SCO... (Score:4, Interesting)
--
Josiwe
Re:Do we care? (Score:2, Interesting)
Which slavic language is that? I recognize the root "yeb" ("fuck") and the root "mrt" (dead) from my three years of Russian in college. The W seems to indicate Polish - it makes heavy use of w's compared to other slavic languages that use the Roman alphabet.
It seems to says "fuck your dead mother, Darl." Did I interpret correctly?
-paul
P.S. - "ebi se v guza Darl" = "fuck you in the ear, Darl" ? I'd be very interested to know the language for all of the phrases you provided.
Re:Barratry.. (Score:4, Interesting)
From
As you can see, if SCO want to sell a license or contract within the UK, the seller (SCO) must specify the characteristics of the purchase. I.E. Specify what rights to what code is for sale/licensed under the contract. That can't be NDA'd either, as terms of sale are not allowed to be confidential.
IANAL etc.
SCO isn't thinking! (Score:3, Interesting)
Go to Groklaw [groklaw.net] and read the Asset purchase agreement yourself. You can see first hand, just how full of shit SCO is, and exactly what rights they have.
Novell never sold any patents to SCO, that is blatantly written in the asset purchase agreement. SCO probably has few if any copyrights to Unix, the document describes copyright transfer conditions, which SCO has not met. SCO and Novell have actually registered many of the same copyrights to the same Unix products (I have no idea who really owns them but both companies can't claim exclusive ownership of the same copyright). It seems what they really bought was the right to use and sell Unix, not own it free and clear. People are stupid, that is the one thing I have learned from all of this. It makes me wonder how many bogus lawsuits have been settled over similar bogus crap in the corporate world. It also makes me wonder just how smart these hotshot lawyers are. This whole episode shows me just how empowering a distributed network of people can be, like the open source community.
*LIAR* (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, if that's the case, then why did your attorney, on the record, in court, tell the judge, "I will proffer to the Court that we are filing a second amended complaint that has copyright infringement claims, and will be filed within the coming few days or no less than a week. And we'll put then fully in front of the Court the three buckets we have outlined here, contract, trade secrets and copyright."
Anyone smell smoke? Because I think Mr. Stowell's pants are on fire.
Re:SCO are psychotic (Score:3, Interesting)
So Sue Them in Small Claims Court (Score:1, Interesting)
1. Pay the damn fee. Its worth it for the entertainment value.
2. The small claims court should have jurisdiction if SCO does business in your state. Since they supply McDonalds and mom and pop stores with register machine OS's, they should be in every state in the union.
3. Are you a consulting software engineer? Can you make an estimate of the *current* damages done to your consulting business and convince a judge. No need to make anything up. Just approach someone who would likely buy systems consulting time from you, who can't because SCO Group has slowed down adoption of unix. Come up with an estimate and make it stick.
4. File the damn case and wait your turn. If you win most jurisdictions will award up to $2000, $3000 or sometimes up to $7000 for each incident.
5. If you win, you will probably have to force collection. That's everything I know.
BTW: I noticed that someone registered 'scoclassaction.com'. That's the spirit!
Re:What I don't understand... (Score:4, Interesting)
So long as you don't specify whose legs it is that you're going to break, I'm afraid it probably is.
I don't believe for a moment that SCO is going to start suing anybody in the UK or anywhere else for that matter.
A quick check on Yahoo Finance shows that their stock has been dropping steadily over the last five days -- and is currently down some $2.50 from its price on Friday.
Whenever this happens, SCO simply issues yet another Press Release in order to justify their various backers' secret support of their stock price.
The various broker firms who are buying on behalf of a secret customer, *cough* Microsoft *cough*, are going to have to say they had some reason for buying when the SEC eventually investigates them. They can point to press releases like this and say: