SCO Lobbying Congress Against Open Code 907
An anonymous reader writes "Along with suing Novell - it was announced today that SCO has been lobbying Congress about the horrifying ways that Linux and the rest of open source software saves users money, allows others to use the software anyway they see fit and 'gasp' causes SCO to not make as much money as they would like. Along with all of the usual FUD. OSAIA has the details (as well as a rebuke)." Darl's words will seem pretty transparent, even funny, to anyone aware of the widespread acceptance and use of Free / Open Source software (by individuals, governments, non-profits, and even companies like SCO) -- but you might have to point this out to your servants in Congress.
But ofcourse (Score:5, Informative)
Re:But ofcourse (Score:5, Informative)
Darl caught lying in Salt Lake (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.slweekly.com/editorial/2004/feat_200
In this article, which is really above average, Darl McBride is quoted making the following interesting statement:
"McBride says SCO revealed the offending code last August at its Las Vegas SCOForum. "Truly, and then they just ignored it," he said."
Now, I must point out Bruce Perens put his analysis of the Las Vegas SCOforum with hours of it ending last August 18th.
Link to Perens analysis:
http://www.perens.org/SCO/SCOSlideShow.html
Also, Darl misquoted Perens' website so Darl knows it exists. Therefore, for Darl McBride to say that the Las Vegas SCOforum's showing of code "was ignored" is to make a lie that can be documented quite easily.
Darl McBride: documented liar
Not just Samba... (Score:5, Informative)
Oh, I get it now! "We don't like free software, except on our terms - i.e. when we're using it exclusively, it's O.K., but otherwise, get rid of it already!"
Geez. They must really, really want to be disliked...
Re:Fight this with private property arguments (Score:4, Informative)
So I'm sorry, you can't use property rights to fight this, you CAN however use copyright law and patent law.
The day we all accept that IP is, indeed "Property" is the day we have lost to the corperations.
Is Darl McBride insane? (Score:3, Informative)
If you're going to write your CongressCritter (Score:5, Informative)
This is obviously just the tip of the iceburg. Anyone have more?
Re:But ofcourse (Score:5, Informative)
Being close to the DRDOS case, I happen to know it. In fact, Caldera created a spinoff around 1997 that was called Caldera Digital Research, that was later renamed Caldera Thin Clients, then Lineo, then Lineo was swallowed by Metrowerks. The folks who profited from the DRDOS case were the lawyers (of course), a bit Lineo and a lot Canopy. Caldera Systems (the Linux folks) didn't profit from that, or perhaps some execs did but not Caldera as a company, unless I'm mistaken.
At any rate, the settlement was estimated around $155M, which is hardly enough to keep such a company afloat for long, especially now. But would you remember it, OpenLinux was once a popular distro, one that was quite ahead of its time. It sold well at some point.
Re:Lobbying Impact (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Fight this with private property arguments (Score:4, Informative)
Jesus H. Christ! Do we have to get into this pendantry every time the word copyright is mentioned on Slashdot?
Yes, you're right. I am mistaken. Authors don't own their work. They do have an time limited exclusive right to their work. That copyright can be bought, sold, leased, traded, given away, mortgaged, or held. In other words, they have a property interest. They don't own the work, but they do own the time limited exclusive right to the work. That copyright is in fact and in law property.
The Supreme Court of the United States has seen fit to describe a copyright as being property. Note carefully that the copyright is property separate and distinct from the work. One interesting case to look at would be Dowling vs. United States.
Re:Lobbying Impact (Score:5, Informative)
Or failing that, just point them to IBM and the enormous success they've enjoyed with Linux in spite of the fact that it's free. Microsoft and a couple of patent-mongering UNIX firms may be losing money from this, but everybody else is gaining from it.
Write your congressmen (Score:2, Informative)
The form letter is automatically sent to the the appropriate senator and representatives who represent you in your district. You do not need to bother looking up their e-mail addresses. You can add your own comments before the letter is sent. Here is the link to the anti-SCO form letter:
http://action.eff.org/action/index.asp?step=2&i
Let congress now we care about our legal rights as Linux users.
Re:In other words? (Score:2, Informative)
You don't mean The Halloween Documents [opensource.org], do you?
Re:Lobbying Congress (Score:3, Informative)
The most ironic thing is that IBM makes a great deal more money off their hardware and consulting (read: services) division than their Linux division. To quote from their recent SEC filing they "had more than $17 billion in services signing."
Hard numbers from their 4th Quarter: Global Services division produced $11.4 billion (including maintenance). Hardware was at $9.1 billion. Revenues from software were $4.3 billion.
Software is nothing in the grand scheme of technology. Implementing that software through knowledge of hardware and software and the business environment it is being deployed in is everything.
Continuing on that trend and to reiterate a point made in many prior posts: this is a global economy. Software production is being outsourced from the United States regularly; I wouldn't be surprised to hear the same in Germany, France, and the United Kingdom to some extent. Many of us fear for our jobs, ultimately, but customization of open source software is still required in many cases. As well simply having a brain on our shoulders can help us accurately deploy a system - even if the software is designed by someone else.
The end point is again, simple. Software is nothing in the great world of business technology. It used to be a primary revenue creator but that stopped when technology became prominent in all walks of life, and more people became familiar with all of its aspects.
--Brian
Our "Servants" in Congress (and the Senate) (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Do some research, Darl. (Score:1, Informative)
Open Source != GPL (Score:4, Informative)
Constitutionally-protected act (Score:2, Informative)
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Note the phrase "petition the Government..."
Yes, SCO is still full of shit, but they have the right to advertise to Congress that they're full of shit.
Re:Last paragraph on Point #1 (Score:3, Informative)
(Hint: read the top job)
Re:So... VERY OT thread... (Score:2, Informative)
Once all this is completed, the High Council deliberates and renders a decision. Disfellowship, excommunication or some other punishment.
I was involved with helping a bishop years ago as ward clerk and had some involvement in this once. The process is VERY private. The person IMO needs help and this is the beginning of that process. Once this goes to court and when SCO loses, Daryl could end up with a lot more trouble than he bargened for.
Again, this is a private process not designed to freak anyone out. It's designed to put someone on the path of healing.
Re:Lying is only illegal if partisan lines are cro (Score:3, Informative)
You are yet another one of millions of people who just don't get it. IN COURT they defined 'sexual relations' as COITUS, Bill Clinton DID NOT HAVE COITUS with that women, so he had to say "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" when in court - otherwise he would have actually been commiting perjury.
Right now i'm twenty.. this issue happened in what.. 1997? I would have been what was it... 13 and I understood this at that time.
What postponement? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I already asked (Score:2, Informative)
Who cares? Organisations do not... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:So... VERY OT thread... (Score:1, Informative)