DaimlerChrysler/SCO Case Winds Down 317
kuwan writes "It was previously reported that SCO moved for and was denied a stay in their case agains DaimlerChrysler. (Remember that all of SCO's claims against DaimlerChrysler were thrown out except for the issue of whether or not DaimlerChrysler made its certification in a timely manner.) The opposition and reply memos for that motion are now available and apparently SCO's motion was so weak that DaimlerChrysler is asking SCO to pay the cost of preparing their opposition memo. A nice summary of the latest maneuvers is available at scofacts.org."
Fall of SCO (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Fall of SCO (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Fall of SCO (Score:2)
* bzzzzzz... *
SCO faces a bleak future blah blah blah
* zzzzt... *
Re:Fall of SCO (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Fall of SCO (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Fall of SCO (Score:2)
Fans of the GPL we may be, but I still think BSD would be more appropriate in this case.
Re:Fall of SCO (Score:3, Insightful)
So far there's no evidence of any more bones than a jellyfish.
Re:Fall of SCO (Score:2)
Re:Fall of SCO (Score:2)
Re:Fall of SCO (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Fall of SCO (Score:4, Funny)
If you mean "when they will stop moaning and disturbing the living ones" - well, that's a question for an Exorcist, not a geek.
Re:Fall of SCO (Score:2)
f you mean "when they will stop moaning and disturbing the living ones" - well, that's a question for an Exorcist, not a geek.
What religion has an exorcism that works on lawyers? I want to join, sit in the front pew, and testify!
Netcraft confirms it (Score:2)
It is official.
Netcraft confirms: SCO is dying
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered SCO community when IDC confirmed that SCO market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all Linux distribution versions. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that SCO has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. SCO is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by falling dead la
Re:Fall of SCO (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Fall of SCO (Score:2)
Nice advert (Score:4, Funny)
Dunno if it is luck or the usual Slashdot editor impartial and unbiased reporting
Hopefully a few more whacks and it will be gone for good.
Re:Nice advert (Score:2)
Re:Nice advert (Score:2, Funny)
a few more whacks
Enough with the sexual innuendo already! I don't know what exactly your relation with SCO is, but I'm quite sure it's going too far =)
SCO Must Die! (Score:3, Funny)
Would be nice... (Score:2, Troll)
Working link (Score:2)
SCO's claims Against Daimler-Chrysler Thrown Out [slashdot.org]
I'm not sure why the one in the article I submitted didn't work as it's the same one I'm posting here.
DaimlerChrysler's Certification (Score:2)
Re:DaimlerChrysler's Certification (Score:5, Informative)
DCC was one of the thousands that didn't reply. For whatever reason SCO decided to sue them as an example or something. DC basically replied with "We haven't used the software we licensed from AT&T for over seven years; there we've certified now go away" A judge ruled that this was a valid certification and threw 99% of the case away. They left SCO the option to continue the case soley on the basis of whether DC certified promptly enough (the contract between AT&T and DC didn't mention a deadline for this certification)
Amazingly SCO decided to continue the case in that vein -- probably so they don't have to admit defeat quite yet. Of course now they're trying to put the case so far on the back burner that it will never actually go to trial. DC is fighting that and trying to get SCO to go to trial now.
Re:DaimlerChrysler's Certification (Score:5, Informative)
Again, this case was mostly about the hare-brained scheme that McBride and his cronies cooked up. Having been a litigious bastard in his own right, McBride thought that as soon as he started throwing the word "lawsuit" around, everyone subject to the threat would simply crumple up and pay SCO rather than fight back, and that other UNIX/Linux users would see this and pile on for the SCOSource licenses, thus leading to the huge pump on the stock price in anticipation of this seeming windfall.
Personally, I think McBride should turn back to his bag o' blow.
Re:DaimlerChrysler's Certification (Score:3, Informative)
This is unrelated to the "Linux-IP" licence that SCO tries people to threaten into buying.
Re:DaimlerChrysler's Certification (Score:2)
Raise Money for SCO (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Raise Money for SCO (Score:2)
Re:Raise Money for SCO (Score:3, Funny)
("We're here for your liver.")
Re:Raise Money for SCO (Score:2)
Bear in mind that Darl's not a suitable brain or heart donor.
From back in June 2003 and Beyond competence (Score:5, Interesting)
Every point I made back then has since played out in court as predicted. Even the SCO Group is now relying on the same interpretation of the GPL license in its defence against IBM [groklaw.net].
As I stated on March 10, 2004 [blogspot.com]:
Re:From back in June 2003 and Beyond competence (Score:5, Funny)
Re:From back in June 2003 and Beyond competence (Score:3, Funny)
Re:From back in June 2003 and Beyond competence (Score:3, Interesting)
While we're on the subject of articles outlining SCO's problems in the past, please check out my journal article "A Linux User's Response to Darl McBride's Open Letter to the Open Source Community", originally published here on Sept. 11, 2003:
http://slashdot.org/~MuParadigm/journal
I read the headline as... (Score:2)
Maybe we'll be so lucky.
Cheers,
Richard
Re:I read the headline as... (Score:2)
Chysler attorney: Your honor, they sent the letter to our old corporate headquarters address, which is now a vacant field in Highland Park between I-75 and Highland Avenue. We never received it. In fact, we didn't know if its existence until they filed suit.
Judge: Decision in favor of plantiff, case summarily dismissed with prejudice. Next case.
guilty condcience? (Score:2, Funny)
I mean geez, they're just another legit company trying to make it in this high tech industry. Won't anyone give them a break?
Re:guilty condcience? (Score:4, Funny)
No.
Re:guilty condcience? (Score:4, Funny)
Won't anyone give them a break?
My pleasure. Arm or Leg?
#1 sign your business is in trouble: (Score:5, Funny)
Re:#1 sign your business is in trouble: (Score:2)
Eventually novell is going to ask for it's 95% of the money from MS and Sun and the IBM lawyers will start demanding money for having to write so many opposition documents to their silly, stupid delay motions and demands for irrational discovery.
What shocks me about all this is the lack of any rationality from the judges. More then two years into the case and judge kimball hasn't demande
Re:#1 sign your business is in trouble: (Score:2)
Out smarted more than out gunned (Score:3, Insightful)
(OT) Just to be a really picky /.er. (Score:2)
Oh, and all M$ products sitting on a shelf are in their original boxes and amount to old copies of WFW and MS-DOS 3.2.
>>>
Did you mean MS-DOS 3.3 or perhaps MS-DOS 6.2?
3.2 wasn't the disaster that was DOS 4 but it was a pain. Most companies quickly upgraded when 3.3 came out.
I wonder... (Score:4, Insightful)
I am not a lawyer (but I know a few good jokes about them), but would a "win" against SCO basically kill off their entire case? If DC "wins" (or the case is dismissed), does that mean SCO's claims of licensing fees are over? And if that happens, can the few who actually paid SCO "licensing" fees get a refund?
Re:I wonder... (Score:2)
IANAL but I wouldn't think so. In the DC case, SCO didn't go after them directly for infringement or licensing by using Linux. They went after them for not certifying their obsoleted Unix systems.
As
On the day sco dies. (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah Except (Score:2)
Costs on Motion (Score:3, Informative)
Nice variety of sources (Score:4, Insightful)
sPh
Re:Wow (Score:2)
Just out of curiosity - what language is your website in, btw?
I'm guessing it's some Scandinavian language?
Re:Wow (Score:2)
Not really, it's Slavic language [wikipedia.org]: Polish.
Robert
Re:Wow (Score:2)
Thanks!
Re:Wow (Score:3, Informative)
It depends. Some people from Poland, Czech, or post-yugoslavian countries might disagree and punch you in the face
Thing is, the term "Slavic" crosses the boundary of what was always considered Central Europe and Eastern Europe. Traditionally, before 20th century, East Europe was synonymous with Orthodox Church (Pravoswavny as some Slavs would say), Greek/Byzantium culture, and cyryllic writing. Catholic/Protestant Slavic countries with
Re:Wow (Score:2, Informative)
American poitics, the general intelligence of Americans, idiotic foriegn policies and the tribulations of having to live with Bush are off the topic.
Want to discuss those topics? Submit an article to
Re:Wow (Score:4, Interesting)
No. "Irony" implies that something different than the expected result happened. I can see nothing unexpected in either
- a meta-discussion being considered off-topic,
- an off-topic post mentioning the word off-topic itself,
- such a post being modded off-topic,
-
- even if such a post complains about exactly this (this is
- a post (indirectly) forseeing its moderation getting modded real high or real low,
- and so on.
Regardless how you spin it, there isn't much irony in how it got modded, especially considering this is Slashdot.
*I don't consider this thread to be on-topic (as its meta-discussion started with a troll), but let's be open-minded for a moment.
Re:for USAsian crusaders every dissident is a here (Score:2)
For someone... (Score:4, Insightful)
It's too bad that people can get up on their soapbox like the parent post, but can't do so under their own names.
Re:For someone... (Score:3, Interesting)
They think that the war in Iraq was started in light of incredibly bad intelligence, and that the president is an idiot to have made the conclusion to go to war this soon. They do not care whether or not abortion is outlawe
Re:For someone... (Score:2)
30 December 1998: Obliteration of Iraq [userfriendly.org]: "Clinton is bad man!"
22 February 1998: It's this Iraq thing [userfriendly.org]. "Clinton might just go ahead with an attack. The last thing we need is another war on this planet."
America has always had problems with Iraq. It's not just Bush's personal vendetta or the Republican "neocon"s' way to take over the world.
OK, yeah, this is offtopic here; I might repost these links n
Re:for USAsian crusaders every dissident is a here (Score:2)
You act as if there are no subgroups within t his so-called "white" race. I'll also point out that a lot of our presidents have NOT been Catholic. Christians yes, but when the majority of voters are Christians, what would you expect? As far as non-male, the point is taken, but we do have women in Congress. Congress could stop a lot of what the President does if they wanted to. Refusing to fund Vietnam or Iraq would've made those campaigns not worth do
Re:for USAsian crusaders every dissident is a here (Score:2)
Re:for USAsian crusaders every dissident is a here (Score:2)
Re:for USAsian crusaders every dissident is a here (Score:2)
You are an idiot. Owning property is at the core of the beliefs of the middle-aged white men crowd.
It is the liberals who make claims that not all property should be owned, and if you have more property then you should pay more for each piece you own.
If anyone it is the hippies (note this is not a jab at the liberals, I actually mean the hippies) who want to abolish all property.
Re:for USAsian crusaders every dissident is a here (Score:2, Informative)
You forget, it's not a few, it's the majority that is accepting this, and the rest of the world is well in its rights to judge a nation by the actions of its majority. Iraq has happened, Guantanamo bay has happened, Abu Ghraib has happened, Falluja has happened, Molub and other towns are happening, and the ones ultimately responsible have been given a carte blanche to screw up some more. Face it, the excuse that the fuckup government wa
Re:Wow (Score:2)
Robert
Have fun and amaze your friends! (Score:3, Funny)
"You would all be speaking Farsi and Arabic if not for our brave GIs!"
"You would all be speaking Afghani if not for our brave... I mean, if not for the Pakistan Army!"
"You would all be speaking South American and wearing funny hats like Che Guevara if not for
Re:Have fun and amaze your friends! (Score:2)
Jesus christ, I'm in worse shape than I thought!
Re:Wow (Score:2)
Correct, however it took thousands of years. Using your analogy, the world should be under the foot of the US for another 1800 years or so.
Might as well get comfortable...its going to be a long show.
Re:Wow (Score:3, Informative)
Correct, however it took thousands of years. Using your analogy, the world should be under the foot of the US for another 1800 years or so.
Ok, I know this is nitpicking but although one could claim it was about 1800 years (until 1453 defeat of Byzantine, eastern Rome), in practice the full roman hegemony "only" lasted for couple of centuries (maybe from ~100BC until ~300 AD). The fall of western Rome (476?) split the empire in half, and although Byzantine did recover some la
Re:This is a non-story (Score:2, Funny)
As I watched groklaw grow, I thought "man, this woman has no clue about open source", but now that it has devolved into mindless sycophantic cult worship, infighting, backstabbing and replacing emotion for rational discourse, I thought "she finally gets it."
Good luck with all that.
Re:This is a non-story (Score:2)
If I had them, you'd have gotten all five -- a/c or not.
Thanks for the first laugh I've ever had over this story.
Al's work is valuable (Score:2)
How does this have anything to do with the facts that were presented? Regardless of what Al's status is on Groklaw, he is the one that actually did the work to get the copies of the Opposition and Reply memos so that we could be discussing them here. He should get credit for that and the other work that he's done. Groklaw even links to his site, scofacts.org, for copies of some of the documents.
Now if you don't like Al's analysis then that's fine,
Re:This is a non-story (Score:2)
There is also an attempt to smear Al's name going on on various web sites. The root source of this smear campaign is an open and interesting question.
sPh
Please attack the arguement, not the man (Score:3, Insightful)
'Petrovsky's "analysis" is weak and off-base, as usual.'
Okay, please be specific about where and how the arguement is "off base" and "weak." I don't care who considers Pertrovsky a troll. I want specific facts.
Thank you for your reply.
Some Groklaw trolls now at ip-wars.net (Score:2)
harlan
al_petrofsky
talk_to_birds
rus
br3n
Long time readers of Groklaw will probably recognize these names.
The revolution may not be televised but it will be chronicled at ip-wars.net.
Highly respected members of the FOSS community (Score:2)
sPh
Re:Highly respected members of the FOSS community (Score:2)
Thanks for the header change and the clickable link. My obtuse humor and fondness for ascii sometimes precludes effective communication.
Re:Some Groklaw trolls now at ip-wars.net (Score:2)
Actually, br3n's not gone yet, though Pam has threatened br3n, in a post on Groklaw, with "thinking deep thoughts" about doing deleting her.
Yes, this is Pam's way of getting agreement on GL -- not by arguing the points, but by threatening with deletion anyone who disagrees with her, whether at Groklaw, or *anywhere on the internet*.
Brilliant strategy, Pam. I mean, hey, it worked for Stalin.
PJ is a censorer. (Score:2)
PJ doesn't just delete trolls, obscene posts, and posts that are intended to insult. PJ will delete anything that doesn't suck-up to the groklaw party line.
On groklaw, there is no real discussion. It's a big circle-jerk. And it's too bad, because groklaw used to be a really great site.
Re:PJ is a censorer. (Score:2)
You fail to understand that the war is not about post deletions. I have asked repeatedly for my posts to be deleted, and would be overjoyed if they were, but instead they remain there at Groklaw, with the author now listed as "Anonymous".
So the 'war' is about authorial attribution, not post deletion.
And quite frankly, anyone who wishes to blame software for changing every post of a deleted member to read "Authored by: Anony
Re:PJ is a censorer. (Score:2)
If you are so concerned about post attribution, how about putting your name in the actual message from now on?
Re:PJ is a censorer. (Score:2)
Here we go with this same excuse yet again. Well, it might have been an excuse once, but now that PJ knows what happens when accounts are deleted it is no excuse at all. She knows what the software does yet she is still happily deleting accounts as fast as she can find people to disagree with.
If you are so concerned about post attribution, how about putting your nam
Re:This is a non-story (Score:2)
Hmm, well, no one likes that, do they?
On the other hand, you are also mischaracterizing the issue. Pam Jones deletes accounts *AND* the authorial attributions of the members posts.
In other words, Pam continues to use the work of people she's deleted, but
Re:This is a non-story (Score:2)
Seems like most of the so-called "Pro-Groklaw" crowd is contributing to this conversation as "Anonymous Coward". What are you afraid of?
Re:This is a non-story (Score:2)
In fact, all the information to answer your question can be determined from my single - means '1' - journal article.
If you're too lazy or stupid to take it from there, I'm afraid I decline to help you. Especially as your motives are obviously less than charitable.
Fuckwit.
Re:Al's Biasment (Score:2)
shares and that he hopes to mitigate the low value perception of
SCOs business."
He has several thousand shares *SHORTED*, Fuckwit.
Why don't you try telling the truth instead of spreading bullshit?
Re:What a troll! - absolutely not a troll (Score:3, Informative)
I 100% agree that PJ will accept nothing but yes-men. Anything that does not follow the groklaw party line 100% is deleted. PJ is even known to delete accounts for what people posts on other boards.
You will not find meaningful discussion on groklaw anymore, I can assure you of that.
Re:What a troll! - absolutely not a troll (Score:2)
"Anything that does not follow the groklaw party line 100% is deleted"
That's a curious conclusion you've come to, since for the last two months or so PJ has set up dedicated threads in SCO-related articles (titled Official "The SCO Group" Positions) which is reserved for official SCO representatives to freely post.
To date I haven't seen SCO officials comment.
Furthermore the intro to the thread states, " Sub-posts from persons not connected with "The SCO Group" must be very polite, address other pos
curious conclusion? I think not (Score:2)
That's a curious conclusion you've come to, since for the last two months or so PJ has set up dedicated threads in SCO-related articles (titled Official "The SCO Group" Positions) which is reserved for official SCO representatives to freely post.
Pffft. Yeah, okay, PJ made an *exception* for official SCO representatives. Ever hear of the exception that proves the rule? Official SCO representatives *and only* official SCO representatives, are allowed to post anything other typical groklaw sucking up.
Wha
Re:What a troll! - absolutely not a troll (Score:2)
Well then, where are the court documents and transcripts from the Daimler case? Groklaw doesn't have them. Al Petrofsky has gone out of his way to get these documents, report or court hearings, get audio
Re:What a troll! (Score:2)
>Precisely the opposite of reality.
Actually, Anonymous logins can be very enlightened on GL. Most notably is Qutrmass (sp) who always posts anonymously. Makes it harder to find his posts, but it's worth it. Also, there are other examples of Anonymous postings at GL that are well worth reading. It's what keeps me from using the option to remove anonymous posts from view.
Re:The trouble with Groklaw. (Score:3, Interesting)
Why don't you tell us about them? I guarantee your account will be sandoxed within a week and removed within six weeks if you do.
Alternately, having even said as much as you have on
I have never broken any of the posting guidelines at Groklaw, yet my account was removed anyway, and the authorial attributions for all my p
Re:The trouble with Groklaw. (Score:2)
Got a problem differentiating between 'many' and 'all', Bar?
Seems like Pam Jones has a similiar problem with 'meum' and 'teum'.
Re:The trouble with Groklaw. (Score:2)
Bzzzt. Try again, ninthwave. I manually sig'ed every post I made on this subject at Groklaw.
Re:The trouble with Groklaw. (Score:2)
Groklaw has been forked:
http://www.ip-wars.net/
Here's why:
http://www.ip-wars.net/section/grok
As to whether Al Petrofsky is a troll or not, you can see by his recommendation ratings on SCOX, the Yahoo stock discussion board, that he's the third highest rated poster on the board for the quality of his contributions to the discussion -- usually involving as much unpaid effort as the work is linked to in the original article.
You can see Al's rec level on SCOX her
Re:The trouble with Groklaw. (Score:2)
Yes, while you're on warmcat you may want to keep something else in mind:
Warmcat is the handle for Andy Green, one of the leaders in getting Linux to work on the Xbox, which I'm sure most people here will agree was a pretty awesome hack.
This is quality of members Pam Jones is deleting from Groklaw.
Re:The trouble with Groklaw. (Score:2)
Ninthwave: "I meant you have been posting this on an Anoymous login on Groklaw, not without signature... I should have said I have seen your comments since your account has been deleted on groklaw. Is that a good try again?"
Ninthwave: "I guess the gist of all I have tried to say is, how do you fix this. I think it is past the complaining phase and do you just fo
Re: Al's "SELF" interest in SCOX (Score:2)
> ANY of the litigants involved in SCO v World?
Not the litigants, no. However, there was a little problem of her involvement with an operation called OSRM, that was seeking to make a dollar by shilling for Linux insurance.
You'll have heard of OSRM, because that's the organization that Steve Ballmer and SCOX have been citing as recently supporting the case that Linux is full of potential intellectual property liabilities. 228 potential patent viola
Re:This is a non-story (Score:2)
Hang on a second, let me get this straight:
PJ says to Big Gay Al, "You will respec' my authoru-tah!" and hits him with her nightstick.
So Cartman, I mean, PJ, banishes Big Gay Al to Big Gay Al's Animal Sanctuary over on:
http://www.ip-wars.net/
"Oh my God! They've killed John Gabriel's Grokposts!"