Australian Firm Asks SCO To Detail Evidence 488
An anonymous reader submits A Perth, Western Australian company called CyberKnights has told SCO ANZ's MD to detail its IP claims or face legal action for fraud. SCO has just released licenses for Australasia and claims enquiries by several companies already."
criminals (Score:5, Interesting)
But.. (Score:4, Interesting)
ACCC (Score:5, Interesting)
IANAK (Kangaroo), but I've talked to Aussies, and they say the ACCC can really sink its teeth into companies that stir it up.
I think SCO is misunderestimating the tolerance for stupid circus antics from big business overseas. It seems like we'll pander to them for awhile and play along with their stupid games, then frequently let them scurry away, but other countries' governments and court systems aren't so forgiving. Push them, they'll push back. Fortunately, it looks like SCO is the little dorky kid and now he's trying to shove the bullies that are twice as big.
The lessor of two evils, again. (Score:3, Interesting)
How many does it take? (Score:3, Interesting)
Conservative legal system (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:about time (Score:5, Interesting)
I have not yet found, statistics on how many registered voters are fighting back, what state does these voters come from, etc etc. I think it would be interesting if EFF had that to show what kind of support against SCO exists. Anyone know if this exists? (Please tell me I am blind and cant read
unimaginable (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:criminals (Score:1, Interesting)
The bills are on the way (Score:5, Interesting)
Cyberknights make a business move? (Score:2, Interesting)
sig: [insert something clever here]
Re:Think (Score:5, Interesting)
In any case, the duty is not limited to the boards of publicly traded companies. The boards of ALL companies that have stock (i.e., corporations) have this duty. It's just that publicly traded stock has an obvious apparent value; the stock of privately held companies is more difficult to value, if only because you have to guess.
We'd laugh at SCO if they tried it here. (Score:5, Interesting)
If SCO started lawsuits in Australia based on their unsubstantiated claims and yet to be revealed evidence, Aussie judges would dismiss them and tell them to come back with a clue.
Any plaintiffs/prosecutors in the US? (Score:1, Interesting)
Are there any US companies that are (or contemplating) filing suit against SCO for fraud?
It seems like a reasonable legal risk for any plaintiff (or co-plaintiffs) with a large Linux installation. (SCO is not the UNIX copyright-holder of record; SCO's so-called "evidence" has all been easily discredited so far, etc.)
And what about criminal fraud charges? Are there any states that are contemplating this? Is there any chance of federal fraud charges?
No copyright claim (Score:5, Interesting)
Trying it on in NZ too (Score:3, Interesting)
They're trying it on in NZ, too.
The NZOSS [nzoss.org.nz] has put together this summary of the issues [nzoss.org.nz] and is requesting a copy of the license, but not telegraphing its plans so blatantly (ya gotta love Kiwis).
Check out http://WWW.SCO.CO.NZ [sco.co.nz] for a larf.
They're already getting the bird... (Score:3, Interesting)
Massey University has deployed a 132 CPU Helix supercomputer running RedHat Linux 7.3 at its Albany campus in Auckland and would be expected to pay $NZ171,192.61 for the right to continue using its operating system. The director of parallel computing, Chris Messon, says that's not going to happen. "We have no plans to pay off SCO."
And Weta Digital...
Operations manager Milton Ngan says any move to pay the licence would be seen as capitulation and Weta isn't about to start down that road. "We won't make any moves till we see what the rest of the industry does. We're a small company a long way from SCO so we'll try to stay here out of sight."