SCO May Countersue Red Hat, SuSE Joins The Fray 622
uninet writes "The SCO Group, Inc. today released a statement concerning the lawsuit filed against it yesterday by Red Hat, Inc. The release quotes Darl McBride, SCO's President and CEO, as being 'disappointed' with Red Hat CEO Matthew Szulik for not being 'forthcoming' about Red Hat's intentions in a previous discussion."
Reader psykocrime adds "According to this SuSE press release, SuSE has publically announced their support for RedHat's actions against SCO. Quoting from the press release: 'SCO has already been halted in Germany and we applaud Red Hat's actions to help end their activities in the US -- and beyond. We applaud their efforts to restrict the rhetoric of the SCO group -- and the FUD they are trying to instill -- and will determine quickly what actions SuSE can take to support Red Hat in their efforts.'" Read on for a few more links.
Vladimir writes "What no one has really touched upon is that the SCO vs. IBM court date is in April 2005, which could mean that the resolution of this case could be somewhere in 2006-2007, by which time Linux or any other OS may be irrelevant. People please keep your wallets in your pocket. Also, this lawyer has a long analysis of SCO extortion attempts and debunks a lot of their FUD."
Besides which, Omega writes "VNUnet has a story on how the economic analysis firm The Butler Group predicts that even if SCO can demonstrate there is offending code in the Linux kernel, it could easily be replaced."
They always countersue (Score:5, Informative)
Nothing to see here, move along...
Re:They always countersue (Score:4, Insightful)
Especially WITH NO PROOF WHAT-SO-EVER.
What if Ford motor company went to all the people who bought GM products and said to them, "Chevy, Pontiac and freinds stole technology from us, I am not going to tell you what they stole and how they stole it, but you should know that many of the people who designed for GM have also worked for other companies who make cars, including Ford. If you don't pay us 3000 dollars for every GM car you own within 3 months then I may have the government put you in jail, or mske you pay a big fine on top of what you owe us for using GM products."
I doubt that would go on long with out some serious reprocussions.
*And don't forget that SCO hasn't SUED REDHAT AT ALL. This is not a counter-suit. SCO has sued IBM, which sells Redhat products along with some of it's servers, but that doesn't have much bearing on the lawsuite at all. SCO allegesthat IBM put some code from AIX into Linux, during IBM's development of it's contribution to Linux's code base; thus "devalueing Unix".
The rest is a bunch a propaganda BS that SCO is using in a attempt to frighten unwitting people into giving them free money. SCO's version of UNIX is inferiorer in pretty much everyway, not only to Linux, but NetBSD, FreeBSD, and in some aspects to OpenBSD, PLUS ALL the commercial versions on Unix such as AIX or Solaras.
SCO is screwed even if they win the lawsuit. It's a company with no future and open source deployment and support was their best bet for survival, however limited, and they flushed that down the f*king drain.
This lawsuit is just a chance for them to get the company recognized as a unix provider so that their stock market "value" goes up and give the to p execs a chance to unload their stocks with as little as a loss as possible before their investors realise that they are banking on a loser and pull out, which I would think would be around... ahhh sometime between 2005 and 2006?
I am just happy to see a lawsuit that is not frivolus comming out of the american justice system.
Re:They always countersue (Score:5, Funny)
--
Sco Sucks
Re:They always countersue (Score:5, Funny)
while (myCompany.capital() > 1)
{
willsue = TRUE;
}
willsue = FALSE;
return myCompany.chaptereleven();
Interesting thing.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure, SCO will get the money from the lawsuit itself, but nothing beyond that.
Sun.
Think about it. If major corporations are forced to switch away from linux, Solaris is the next viable product. SCO is not only a bad product, but they've sucessfully put the last nail in their own coffin with this lawsuit. They pissed off the majority of the industry.
Microsoft wouldnt take the market, because all the applications and development are designed around linux/unix environments.
Don't get me wrong, I like a lot of what Sun is doing, but they're probably waiting with baited breath to see the outcome of this.
Re:Interesting thing.. (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think so. Solaris is a little more expensive than what most Linux users are used to paying. You really can't think of any other free, UNIX-like operating systems with a proven technical track record? I'll give you a hint - their names end in BSD.
Sure Sun may be the most viable commercial product, but I think you'd see the *BSDs picking up a lot more users than Solaris would.
Of course, the truth is that most Linux users would probably just continue to do so. So they have to download it from offshore - big deal. It's not like the BSA could touch them (no filthy EULA to empower them). They'd have to be tracked down and prosecuted by regular law enforcement for copyright violation. Good luck with that one, SCO.
Re:Solaris Is Going Away (Score:4, Informative)
Dumping it would be 'bad' by any measure. The best thing that I'd personally like to see happen is them merging Solaris and Linux.
Linux has a lot of quick & dirty hacks, it supports a ton of consumer hardware, etc., solaris is more of a stable-well-thought-out OS, that lacks some of that 'agility' that Linux has.
Re:Interesting thing.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Sun.
My opinion is (and, hey, I post on Slashdot so I've gotta have an opinion) it isn't about SCO or Unix at all. It's about some opportunist executives sucking the last life out of a dying company.
I think the original plan was to sue IBM, have IBM buy SCO, exercise their stock options, open their golden parachutes and bail out.
When that plan failed, their backup plan was to pump-up their stock prices using exaggerated claims about the value of their Unix intellectual property rights while quietly exercising their stock options and selling off their stock in the background (I hope the SEC is looking into this).
I think that as soon as they've sold off all of their personally held stock, the executives will open their golden parachutes together and bail out and SCO (and their lawsuit) will die shortly thereafter.
I hope Boies was smart enough to get paid in advance.
Re:They always countersue (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Yes, but... (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh, wait, you are! Either directly if you buy Red Hat (or Suse now too) products, or indirectly if you just like to use OS software, since that "lawyer money" could have been better spent on software development.
Re:Yes, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
In closed source, a competitor not developing software often helps you. In open source it usually hurts you too.
So, to re-iterate, any OS development money spent on lawsuits hurts OS movement. Of course there are cases where the results or just the publicity of the lawsuit can help more (or hurt less) than not going to court, but that's beside the point.
Re:Yes, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
While I hate to see ANYONE having to spend money on lawyers to defend Linux, I think that it's money well spent in this case. Hopefully it results in a financial penalty in damages as well as just stops SCO's behavior. After all, RedHat loses money when people are scared off Linux.
This suit will hopefully force SCO to put up or shut up.
It's like SNK versus Capcom! (Score:5, Funny)
SCO is down to its last bit of health, it looks like the end!
Oh wait, SCO just tagged out! Here comes Microsoft!
Re:It's like SNK versus Capcom! (Score:3, Funny)
Would they use the SuSEplex move on SCO?
An insult on the US justice system... (Score:5, Insightful)
It took all of 7 days fot LinuxTAG to shut up SCO in Germany, likewise in Poland and Australia. If SCO is yet to prove it's case, why is it possible for it to keep yelling everyday? The US justice system is too free, maybe
-
Re:An insult on the US justice system... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:An insult on the US justice system... (Score:3, Insightful)
The worst part (for American citizens, that is) of all the senility of US justice system is that, on the long run, who wants to innovate, or even work? Become a professional suer and you'll be well-done for the rest of your life. Be a Canopy Group-like and you'll be rewarded on the casinos known
Re:An insult on the US justice system... (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, the Securities and Exchange Commission needs to get involved. An SEC investigation would cast a little FUD right back at SCO, though it would be much more truthful than the crap SCO's spreading around.
Re:An insult on the US justice system... (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, you're right... what the US needs is a good dictator.
Re:An insult on the US justice system... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:An insult on the US justice system... (Score:4, Insightful)
As opposed to, say, getting a blowjob?
Think about it this way: What's easier to get on prime-time television, a scene of a woman getting punched or a scene of a woman bearing her breasts? A scene of full-penetration sex or a scene where someone dies violently?
Which is our culture more afraid of - sex or violence? Feeling good or making others feel bad?
Re:An insult on the US justice system... (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes. Basically if you lie about where you stuck your cock you get impeached. If you lie about taking the nation to war then It's cool.
Re:An insult on the US justice system... (Score:4, Insightful)
Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe SCO did not defend itself in Europe or Australia so the courts there issued summary judgement.
Why didn't SCO defend itself? Because in thier estimate of the situation, the concluded that the outcome wasn't going to affect thier stock price back in the US. Had they defended themselves, it would have taken months to get an injunction in Germany just like it's taking months in the US.
So, this is not "an insult on the US justice system" so much as it is an insite into the strategy of SCO. This is just more evidence that they are doing a pump and dump.
See the code (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:See the code (Score:5, Funny)
- Jim Carey, Liar, Liar
Re:See the code (Score:5, Interesting)
Probable view: If they show the code, it would be out of the kernel in 4 hours, and re-written in a day, their case would collapse.
Re:See the code (Score:5, Insightful)
But the binaries of the kernels in question are still out there on thousands of machines. Removing the code would of course cancel out any claim they had to licensing revenues for further kernel builds, which I guess is not a hand they would willingly give up...
Re:See the code (Score:5, Insightful)
Improper analogy (Score:4, Informative)
Re:See the code (Score:3, Insightful)
Is there a legal basis for this? I do not doubt for a minute that any infringing code could be rewritten quickly, but why would an otherwise legitamite SCO case collapse? As an analogy, my neighbor breaks into my house and infringes upon (steals) my tv, I sue him and he says "ok I'll put it back". It seems to me that he is still guilty of a crime.
Re:See the code (Score:4, Insightful)
Here's a closer analogy. You borrow a pen from a co-worker. You forget to return said pen. Co-worker accuses you of theft, but refuses to say what you have stolen. I don't think the case would get very far, given that a pen hardly costs anything, the theft wasn't intentional, and you would likely return the pen had he asked.
You're using the WRONG analogy... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:See the code (Score:3, Interesting)
We'll see:
PinkFairies.org [pinkfairies.org] - Home of the SCO code bounty hunt.
Hopefully we'll sweat it out of 'em. Got code? Claim your prize!
~Will
Re:See the code (Score:5, Informative)
SCO states that IBM had to protect not only the licensed source code but also the code IBM wrote to make a derivative work from the source code.
Re:See the code (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:See the code (Score:3, Informative)
Re:See the code (Score:3, Insightful)
> If it's in the kernel everyone can already see
> it so why the secrecy and complicated NDA stuff?
Maybe they're afraid. I bet that only days after they show us the source there will be a clean version of the Linux kernel, perhaps with a few features disabled. In any case, it'll only take a short time to get a clean kernel. And then they can't force anyone into paying them...
Isn't open source great ?
Re:See the code (Score:4, Funny)
'Cos the justice system is such that anyone can throw shit and ask others to clean up the mess.
'Cos firms are no longer interested in delivering products and services, but in making money and enriching a few directors.
'Cos, maybe there isn't much truth in what SCO's trying to have us believe.
-
Re:See the code (Score:5, Funny)
It's a bit like Schrodinger's cat, except that even if it's alive when it comes out of the box, we immediately kill it anyway.
Re:See the code (Score:5, Insightful)
But telling us the exact release number would infringe on their IP, and we couldnt have that.
Darl, you need to put up, and then shut up when we've removed it from the kernel.
Wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
Linus replacing the code would not have any impact on TSG's damages claim, even if they had one.
Let's make a stupid presumption and say that TSG's code claims are all 100% straight-up correct. Because they have not showed the code, the people they are threatening to sue cannot determine whether they are using it or not. The law requires them to be able to. This has axed any and all damages claims that TSG may have had. TSG is able to claim zero dollars in damages right now because they've massively contributed to the damage by their own acts.
It would also take a very unreasonable judge to disallow you time to bring your systems into compliance, and as you said, Linus and his troops would replace it so fast that TSG wouldn't even have time to print out the legal documents requiring them to stop using UnixWare-derived code, let alone serve those papers. Some of the bits would head out over the wire only half-compressed.
A Pyrric victory indeed for TSG. So instead they try extortion - and I think the wheels are about to come off that caper as well.
Re:See the code (Score:3, Informative)
More info here:
Linux Dispute Keeps Escalating [thestreet.com]
Don't forget, SCO is also under SEC investigation for financial misdoings. "The consolidated complaint alleges certain improprieties regarding the circumstances surrounding the underwriters' conduct during the Company's [SCO's] initial public offe
Buying the SCO-licence in Germany not possible (Score:5, Informative)
It looks like there is absolutly no chance to buy the SCO licence for Linux in Germany at the moment.
Speaking of licenses (Score:5, Interesting)
Ha! I can just see Darl "Pirana" McBride's next bright idea, SCOO, the Santa Cruz Other Operation.
Re:Speaking of licenses (Score:3, Funny)
Forthcoming about their intentions? (Score:5, Interesting)
What, just like SCO were when they decided to distribute a Linux distro, including code that said "Please use me", and then get all of their revenue by suing people for doing so?
Remind me, what SEC filing that that plan appear on? Because it seems to me like "Abandon development and marketing of obselete product, make all of our money from barratry" would be the sort of thing that investors would like to know about beforehand.
Re:Forthcoming about their intentions? (Score:5, Insightful)
But as we all know, history, logic, and legal precident have no place in a court of law.
Now look for the others as well (Score:4, Insightful)
What i am interested in finding out is if any of the companies will put their money where their mouth is... donate to the Open Source Now! fund.
Re:Now look for the others as well (Score:3, Insightful)
Outside the US we don't care a bit about SCO shit and al.
If they dare to do something in Europe or most other countries they'll be shot before they have finished their sentence (see SCO Germany for instance).
This is another proof the US Legal System is not working anymore.
Analysis - More than Linux hinges on this (Score:5, Insightful)
If SCO comes out ahead, there will be imitators. If "Extortion Liscenses" work once, people will try it again. How many claims for "IP violations" will there be by hucksters offering to sell "insurance."
I don't think SCO's imitatable yet since all they've done so far is inflate their stock price and annoy people. There are plenty of ways to inflate your stock price.
I don't expect SCO to win. But it is something that struck me as important.
Re:Analysis - More than Linux hinges on this (Score:5, Funny)
You're right, tar is not just a linux thing. Like most GNU programs, it is very portable. ;^)
Lawyerspeak (Score:5, Funny)
And from the page:
"The jerkheads at SCO refuse to disclose what their IP is choosing instead to only make general and ambiguous public and inflammatory claims about others. Without proof, of course. Even without substance."
I don't know when the last time I've heard a lawyer use "jerkheads" was, but it was probably a long time ago, if ever
N.
Re:Lawyerspeak (Score:3, Insightful)
A good lawyer, for that matter anyone with a brain would never use swear words (no matter how mild) in a document. Not even on the internet.
I wouldn't put to much trust in this "lawyer" words, if he speaks the same way in a courtroom he will be on charges of contempt before the charges have been read.
Re:Lawyerspeak (Score:4, Funny)
So true. They normally make heavy use of the time-venerated "stupidhead" descriptor, and somewhat less frequently, the softer "poo-head".
Lamentations: How Long? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's becoming clear that SCO is a rather deliberate-placed fly in the soothing low cost ointment of growing Linux deployments.
It's also clear that certain companies stand to benefit from slowing the rate of Linux adoption. It's in their interest to keep the question raised by SCO open for as long as possible because it will retard the growth rate of Linux. (I doubt the number of Linux deployments will decrease, or even level off, but the growth rate will probably slow.)
So how long will it take for the SCO issue to be closed?
Most current Linux users have dismissed SCO's claims as frivolous, but potential new users are probably more easily dissuaded by these kinds of questions.
What kind of legal event and how long will it take before SCO claims are no longer a question?
The most important line for your PHB: (Score:5, Insightful)
Definitely good ammo if someone gets cold feet towards Linux.
what sun thinks (Score:5, Informative)
In the early 1990's, Schwartz said, Sun chief executive Scott McNealy agreed to spend several million dollars to take a broad license with AT&T, essentially granting Sun legal rights equivalent to ownership of Unix code.
"As a result of that decision in 1993, we can do whatever we want (to the code)," Schwartz said. "We can drive forward and indemnify our customers too," a basic responsibility of any intellectual property provider, he said.
Comment removed (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Instead of just taking SCO to courrt.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Absolutely not. The actions of the SCO executive are unethical, unconscionable, and at least in Germany, illegal.
Were RedHat or SuSE GMBH to comport themselves in this manner, I would be forced to take a similar dim view of them, and would no longer buy their distributions.
A very large message needs to be sent to companies everywhere: Act reasonable while providing quality products, and customers will stay with you and be loyal. Act like McBride, and go down, hard.
There should be no other outcome.
Not about intellectual property rights (Score:5, Insightful)
Just think: If SCO thought it could win the IBM suit, SCO would be very successful financially. SCO could then take that financial success and license their technology in terms that are legally clear to their customers.
Instead, they're trying to force organizations to be their customers by threatening them with potential lawsuits. And unclear lawsuits at that.
SCO is merely looking for extremely high visibility in the short term - negative visibility which can damage it's ability to be a product OR IP property. Basically, they're pissing off potential customers of their technology (no matter WHO they license it to).
SCO is looking for some short term cash with this deal, likely because all other forms of cashflow have stopped or in the process of stopping. Again, they can only bite the hand that COULD feed it, as at this point they have no product of any value except the threat of lawsuits (which isn't really considered a product).
Is this a repeat of the Rambus wars... (Score:5, Informative)
January 2000 Rambus files patent infringement lawsuit against Hitachi
June 2000 Rambus settles lawsuit against Hitachi
August 2000 Rambus files patent infringement lawsuit against Infineon
August 2000 Micron files patent infringement lawsuit against Rambus
August 2000 Hyundai files patent infringement lawsuit against Rambus
Sept. 2000 Rambus files patent infringement lawsuit against Micron and Hyundai (Hynix)
May 2001 Rambus lawsuit against Infineon dismissed, fined US $3.5 million
August 2001 Rambus faces class-action lawsuit for fraud
Re:Is this a repeat of the Rambus wars... (Score:5, Informative)
January 2003 Rambus wins appeal; court throws out fraud claims, interprets patents favorably to Rambus, and remands for new trial.
But the damage is done... (Score:3, Insightful)
Joe "Unix? Wha?" Average already is wearing his microsoft distributed OSS protected sun glasses, and will only see the bad PR from SCO.
It just sucks that now for every bad vibe that SCO has sent out regarding linux, it means we have to send out ten good vibes. So grab your friendly joe Avergae and explain to them what SCO really repreasents, just try not be too fanatical, people get wierded out by that.
Re:But the damage is done... (Score:4, Insightful)
stronger than if this had never happened.
Linux IP had always been a legal grey area. After this, legal precedent will
be set and everyone will point to this case as a reference for future IP
questions.
Also, because of this suit, Linux is closer to being a household name than
ever before. The public must first be aware of Linux before it can accept it.
Finally, this suit causes the Linux community (and perhaps the larger OSS
community) to put aside some of their differences and become less fragmented.
This can only be a good thing.
Wallpaper of the Penguin smashing the SCO Logo ? (Score:3, Interesting)
It needs to be something tasteful and non-libelous that can be placed, for example, as wallpaper on a corporate desktop.
Anybody got anything that they would like to contribute ? (The kind of thing that I am thinking of is the Penguin smashing the SCO Logo with a sledgehammer)
Re:Wallpaper of the Penguin smashing the SCO Logo (Score:3)
Nothing says fsck you to SCO better than this. [thinkgeek.com]
and in other news (Score:5, Funny)
McBride ended his letter somewhat vaguely by suggesting that Red Hat's "decision to file legal action does not seem conducive to the long-term survivability of Linux."
Yeah, Defending your company's business practices is a horrible way to stay in business. You should attack other people's practices.
a long period of uncertainty (Score:4, Interesting)
i think there are several things going on here, but they all originate from strategic, and not tactical, decisions by redmond. let me start with a comment i heard from a coworker (he's in technical sales), "if anyone can figure out how to make money out of linux, its microsoft."
one: microsoft has recently started to be perceived in the marketplace as stodgy. no, i don't have any business case studies to back it up; i feel it. so they're attempting to tell the world that they can change with the times like the best of them. how? by announcing open source initiatives, etc.
two: despite microsofts continued rants about TCO, business' experience probably show that linux TCO, especially in the area of server administration, and down-time associated with virii, patches and other security issues, is in fact lower. ergo microsoft's focus on security and providing 'enhanced' command-line tools for server administration.
three: they (redmond) know just how long it takes a suit to be completed. this whole series of events figures into some long-range plan. what, i don't know. remember though, this court date for the start of the suit is after the release of longhorn. my bet is that there will be a slew of patches and other enforced upgrades between now and then to change the balance. not in the home, where microsoft is feeling threatened, but in the corporate world, where they are quite seriously running scared.
SCO is hiring! (Score:4, Funny)
They're seeking a Senior Sales Account Manager... oh wait they should have called the job Senior Stupid Cow Milker!
Re:SCO is hiring! (Score:4, Funny)
Someone should infiltrate. Either get the job so you can try to work within their system and convince your coworkers to behave ethically, or get in there and see how long you can keep the job while you royally undermine the company's business.
Bickering Children (Score:3, Interesting)
I as an interested outsider can do two things: laugh my ass off or argyly ignore all post concerning SCO. Since I am finding it more and more difficult to do the first I will shut up now and have me mod -1 now...
SCO (Score:3, Interesting)
I feel soo bad, considering that I just ordered about 2K of licensing upgrades from a SCO distributor for a client yesterday. :(
If it wasn't for a proprietary set of apps, Linux + SCO bin emu was looking very good. I even had a chance to test this scenario, but encountered some serious issues.
This just proves that, like any other commercial OS, if a company adopts a commercial OS, and their production apps are taylored to that environment, the companies are just locked-in, wether they like it or not.
WWF! (Score:4, Funny)
"And, in the left corner, Red Hat is entering the ring, with his trademarked legal fund spandex and red fedora! SuSE is standing by, ready to lend a helping hand to his wrestling partner, while SCO's partner-in-crime, Microsoft is screaming 'HURT HIM!, HURT HIM!' to Darl McBride... But wait! Oh my Gosh! Red Hat has started a double-nuclear-powered screwdriver on both Darl McBride legs!! Wait!! Microsoft is trying to bite Red Hat butt while being severely pounded by 'Mein licenz ist GPL' SuSE!! It's a four way fight, people!"
Aaaaah... Saturday night wrestling... (lick lips in anticipation)...
Let's just hope that the good guys win! 10 to 1 on the little guy with the red hat!
Slashdot category... (Score:3, Insightful)
This thing is here to stay. We really do need a separate slashdot category for SCO stuff...
hedging one's bets (Score:3, Interesting)
The case applies to kernel version 2.4 or later. If you're using 2.2, you're okay. Right?
In order to hedge one's bets, maybe a distinct fork of 2.2 is called for? If we want to be utterly over-the-top paranoid, we need to make sure that if we're called upon to roll back to 2.2, we can do that, even four years from now. Which means we need to make sure device drivers written for new hardware up until then can be made to work with the 2.2-series kernel architecture.
It'd also be good if distributions continued to give the option to use a 2.2-series kernel up until this is resolved. The current stable Debian distribution does; I hope the next two or three do as well.
Free Software on SCO (Score:4, Interesting)
http://ringtonetools.mikekohn.net/license.php
http://asp2
for example.
Maybe other free software developers will do the same?
1 2 1 2 The Naken Crew
Maybe, ultimately, SCO will help us! (Score:3, Insightful)
Too Late... The Needle and the Damage Done (Score:4, Insightful)
First, SCO has opened the flood gates for similar litigation. You think claims that UNIX is in Linux are bad? Wait until every trumped up failure of a company starts claiming IP ownership of everything open source. Not just Linux but all of userspace, applications, libraries, the lot. It's going to be a gold rush with Linux as the grand prize.
Second, the media attention over "indemnity". The closed source vendors are gleefully telling any journalist who will listen: "when you buy closed source we will indemnify you against litigation, when you use open source there is no indemnity". That's a significant blow against open source. I can already see every PHB in the whole damn world reconsidering their plans to deploy Linux because of the fear of lawsuits. If I was a conspiracy nut, I'd say that this was the real reason behind SCOs actions; somebody wanted a noisy and public demonstration that Linux is "risky".
Third, this is the beginning of the end for all corporate support. The growth of open source really exploded once companies took an interest. Not just the kernel but also userspace (OO.org, Mozilla) and infrastructure (GNOME, KDE) and harder concepts like marketting and packaging and sales. Linux went from "that hobbyist thing" to something much more because PHBs figured that if IBM/SGI/HP/Sun are treating it seriously then maybe there was something worth looking at. But can you imagine the CEOs approving Linux development now? Certainly not when Linux development leads to lawsuits from trumped up nothings like SCO. Large companies are slow to react but I predict within 18 months there will be a huge drop in corporate Linux support.
Linux is hurt by these actions. Right or wrong. True or false. None of that matters. I've seen the needle. The damage is done.
A few are taking adv. of SCO's inflated Stock (Score:3, Informative)
the problem with press releases (Score:5, Funny)
Want recent SCO Linux release (Score:4, Funny)
Sources would be good too (I guess I could always load an update kernel binary and source from their website)
Unbelievable business opportunity (Score:5, Funny)
Please forgive me this intrusion, but your name was forwarded to me as a person I can trust. My name is Dr. Mombutu and I am the CEO of SCO for Nigeria. As you are probably aware SCO is now involved in a lawsuit which will undoubtedly result in a multi million dollar settlement as every user of devil spawn Linux will be ordered to pay money that is being owned to SCO as a result of copyright infringement. According to careful estimates this would result in a sum of $47.8 million US Dollars being deposited in SCO's accounts over the period of next 2 (two) years. I would like to offer you 10% (ten percent) of the entire $47.8 million if you help us in the legal fight against Linux. Your contribution will only have to amount to US$ 699 if you have a uniprocessor machine running Linux, US$1149 for a dual processor machine US$2499 for quad and US$4999 for a eight cCPU machine. Each additional single CPU will be $749, while a promotional licence fee for embedded devices is $32 per device. I personally guarantee that 10% of the entire $47.8 million will be deposited into the account of your choice as soon as the lawsuit is completed. Please send cash, certified cheque or money order to
Dr. Mombutu
Box. 2301
1 Aguiyi Ironsi Street
Maitama Abuja, Nigeria NG
Cosa Nostra (Score:3, Funny)
Yeah, and exactly like SCO, it's also known as a "protection racket."
Here are some examples of SCO work in the kernel (Score:3, Informative)
CREDITS:E: sp@caldera.de
arch/i386/kernel/microcode.c: * 1.0 16 Feb 2000, Tigran Aivazian <tigran@sco.com>
arch/i386/kernel/microcode.c: * 1.01 18 Feb 2000, Tigran Aivazian <tigran@sco.com>
arch/i386/kernel/microcode.c: * 1.02 21 Feb 2000, Tigran Aivazian <tigran@sco.com>
arch/i386/kernel/microcode.c: * 1.03 29 Feb 2000, Tigran Aivazian <tigran@sco.com>
drivers/net/slip.c: * from Jim Freeman's <jfree@caldera.com>
drivers/net/tlan.c: * Tigran Aivazian <tigran@sco.com>: TLan_PciProbe() now uses
drivers/char/drm/drm_context.h: * 2001-11-16 Torsten Duwe <duwe@caldera.de>
drivers/scsi/ips.c:/* 4.00.06a - Port to 2.4 (trivial) -- Christoph Hellwig <hch@caldera.de> */
drivers/scsi/advansys.c: Erik Ratcliffe <erik@caldera.com> has done testing of the
drivers/sound/esssolo1.c: * up. Marcus Meissner <mm@caldera.de>
drivers/sound/esssolo1.c: * Marcus Meissner <mm@caldera.de>
drivers/sound/maestro.c: * v0.15 - May 21 2001 - Marcus Meissner <mm@caldera.de>
drivers/sound/rme96xx.c: Marcus Meissner <Marcus.Meissner@caldera.de>
drivers/sound/nm256
drivers/sound/sonicvibes.c: * Meissner <mm@caldera.de>
fs/freevxfs/vxfs_olt.c:&nbs p; printk(KERN_NOTICE "vxfs: please notify hch@caldera.de\n");
net/ipx/af_ipx.c: * Portions Copyright (c) 1995 Caldera, Inc. <greg@caldera.com>
net/ipx/af_spx.c: * Jim Freeman <jfree@caldera.com>
Re:Stay Tuned, Don't Change That Channel! (Score:3, Informative)
kthxbye.
Re:Stay Tuned, Don't Change That Channel! (Score:4, Funny)
In typical Slashdot fashion I didn't read the whole article.
Re:Stay Tuned, Don't Change That Channel! (Score:3, Interesting)
Conspiracy? What the flying-a-747-through-a-Krispy-Kreme fuck?
If they cross the line from bizarre and groundless civil claims into even more bizarre and groundless criminal claims, then all bets are off. I got yer conspiracy right here, and it has to do with issuing press releases in order to manipulate the price of securities.
Several have pointed out that t
Re:SCO (Score:5, Insightful)
But neither here nor there now you are proof that SCO has taken money to license a product that they do not own I believe all kernel contributors can sue them for distribution of their IP against the terms of the GPL which protected their IP.
I repeat SCO does not have a right to license a binary only linux kernel if their IP is in it or not because they do not own the IP of the whole kernel only by their own admission part of it. Without supplying you the full source code upon request.
At least that is my take on it.
Any GPL advocates or kernel contributors want to enlighten the debate further for this is a key issue I would like to see more clarification and discussion on.
Re:SCO (Score:3, Informative)
Tuesday August 5, 12:43 pm ET
SCO Provides Commercial Linux Users With Run-Time, Binary License to Run SCO's Intellectual Property in Linux
# LINDON, Utah, Aug. 5
Re:SCO (Score:3, Insightful)
hey what did you buy? (Score:3, Informative)
and how did you make the case to buy this thin air with your company's CFO?
Copyright infringment looks for damage by the infringer..did you put code in linux?
Re:Can someone explain what 'shorting' is? (Score:3, Informative)
In a nutshell, it's the reverse of a "normal" stock trade... you actually SELL first, THEN buy later.
ex: I believe SCO is going to tank, so I 'sell' 100 shares today at $3 each. In one months, which is how long I bought my short for, I then buy the stock for $1 and (minus commissions, minus the fees for the 3rd party who has to cover the month where I didn't have
Re:Replacing the Code (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Replacing the Code (Score:5, Insightful)
To improve (slightly) your piss-poor analogy, it would be like someone stealing a car from a taxi firm and giving lifts to people. When the thief is caught, those lucky enough to have got a lift wouldn't then get charged retrospective taxi fares - especially not at the extortionate rate this taxi firm feels like!
Any successful action by SCO would be against IBM. If that occurs, they will get damages from IBM, and anyone using Linux can then be required to stop using the offending code, or licence it, but not until.
J.
IANAL, natch, but clearly neither is the author of the parent.
Re:Replacing the Code (Score:5, Insightful)
So why is SCO treatening to sue me? I didn't steal anything, I bought a product from a distributor and at the time I did not have a probable indication of parts of the product being stolen. How am I liable for this supposed theft?
Re:Replacing the Code (Score:5, Insightful)
While you are correct, it is up to the courts to decide what damages to award, if any. SCO estimates the damages at 3 billion, but I'm sure a court would not agree. You see, a company must show that it tried to mitigate the damages as much as possible. Apparently, the alleged code in Linux is so damaging to SCO that they don't want it removed! Also, up until a few months ago SCO was selling Linux for money. Hard to say that Linux damaged SCO's business when they were making money off it. They also continue to distribute the code themselves to this day. Based on this utter lack of failure to mitigate any supposed damages, the damages could just be an order to remove the code. Besides, since when will Linux users have to pay damages? If anyone pays, it will be those who inserted the code, not those who used it in good faith.
Re:Replacing the Code (Score:5, Interesting)
How exactly is this insightful?
His analogy is way off base. He compares knowingly comitting theft, to unknowingly using code that was distributed in breach of contract.
You are not all square... you have to pay for the IP you stole. End of story.
Doesn't this line along give away the post as a troll? There's no end of story. Even if SCO wins the case against IBM, there's nothing saying the will be able to collect damages from anyone else, especially since they have refused to disclose the infringing code. (They were knowingly adding to the damages through their own actions.) Heck, despite what SCO says, it seems the only suit they have filed is about their contract with IBM. Even if IBM did break this contract, it doesn't mean CO owns the copyright to the code.
Re:Replacing the Code (Score:5, Interesting)
Except that SCO themselves claims that they knew back in 2001 that their IP was allegedly in the Linux source tree. Why did they wait 2 more years? So more people could use, buy, adopt, and adapt "their" code, which means more people to extort this bogus licensing from. Sorry, that sword cuts both ways.
No, that would be like the law letting a rapist rape 20 women, instead of 1, so they can nail him on 20 counts of rape, instead of 1.
End of your story, yes, however, reality goes on. The real story is that the GPL is not a EULA. If there was infringing code or IP in the code I was given, which was transferred with the GPL, and no other exclusions or contracts that CLEARLY state that there is IP in the code I've received, I am not guilty of copyright infringement. Got that? Repeat it slowly.
Also, if IBM writes code on their own, which works with the SysV source tree that they bought a license to from SCO, IBM owns the copyright to that code that IBM created, NOT SCO. You can't claim copyright on someone else's copyrighted code. That's not how the law works.
In any case, I do not owe SCO anything for my dozens of Linux boxes, nor does any other Linux user, company, or business using, deploying, distributing, modifying, or selling Linux. Period.
..or should I say, "End of story."
If they knew that it was there since 2001... (Score:3, Insightful)
best defence of them all for linux! (Score:4, Insightful)
also, the agreement provides another establishment that SCO had [or should have had] due dilegence in the knowladge of the contents of the linux kernel and other supporting code...They engaged actively and willingly in cross-licensing the technology from/to other Linux distros! McBride has already hinted that SCO will try to get out of that contract or that it's worthless to the lawsuits...Suse will beg to differ.