SCO Fined in Munich For Linux Claims 436
nordi writes "heise.de reports (in German) that SCO Germany has to pay a fine of 10,000 Euros (~10,800 US$) because they kept on saying that Linux contains stolen intellectual property of SCO. In May a German court had decided that SCO Germany must not continue making those claims." Yes, it's auf Deutsch, so break out babelfish.
We can only hope (Score:5, Insightful)
At the end of the day, companies like Microsoft and SCO won't be stopped by the US. The best we can do is waste a couple hundred million in tax dollars on a useless court case that is headed by a puppet judge. We can only hope that the EU will save us, a body that acts swiftly against vil business tactics, and usually solidly (just look at how they dealt with Nintendo).
Re:We can only hope (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:We can only hope (Score:5, Informative)
Please don't misunderstand this fine. This is not about the (doubtful) statements of SCO.
SCO GmbH in Germany was only fined because they did not fully comply with a preliminary injunction which told them not to repeat certain statements.
Re:We can only hope (Score:2)
Re:We can only hope (Score:2)
Re:We can only hope (Score:2)
"Der Wunsch war Vater des Gedankens"
"The was father of the thought"
(I don't know if the translation left the meaning alive but I think we are all waiting for a judge who finishes this SCO behavior by negating SCO's claims)
Re:We can only hope (Score:2)
Re:We can only hope (Score:2)
I asked my favourite dictionary [leo.org] for "wunsch" but i did not copy the result to the
Re:We can only hope [so OT its funny] (Score:4, Interesting)
Of course our "chips" are not very similar to "Freedom Fries". They are much chunkier, less crisp, always made of chipped potatoes rather than potato puree and covered in salt and sauce (which is a thin mixture of brown sauce and vinegar).
Re:We can only hope (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, this does not mean that they see that they are lying. Only that they did not comply with a court order to quit lying
Seriously, I think this will be viewed as a major setback by SCO. They are trying to coerce people into buying licenses and now they can point to a country which has effectively gagged them. People will become wary of $cos dubious claims.
Re:We can only hope (Score:5, Insightful)
So any "licensing" request can be directly forwarded to court and converted to a payment request.
Re:We can only hope (Score:4, Funny)
Well, $700 USD per CPU are nothing compared to German income tax
So if you sum everything up, surrendering to SCO might not be the worst outcome from a fiscal standpoint.
SCNR.
Not about lying but about proof. (Score:5, Insightful)
A hell of a difference.
Re:Not about lying but about proof. (Score:3, Informative)
Thanks,
Gerard
Re:We can only hope (Score:5, Informative)
Not to quit lying, the court order is more specific:
The court order is against claiming that Linux contains SCO intellectual property without presenting any evidence. SCO Germany now complies with that: www.sco.de doesn't mention IP concerns with Linux at all. They were fined 10000 Euros, because they overlooked a few files, which they removed a few days later. Only 10k Euros, because it was clearly an accident - they overlooked files accessible through https.
SCO Germany is free to turn around and claim IP infringement if (and only if) they include evidence.
Re:We can only hope (Score:5, Informative)
Indeed. And they can be re-fined and the fines can be made higher if they repeat the statements again. They basically where fined because they disobeyed a court order. The original court order was issued because the judge(s) thought it likely that the claims SCO made where untrue and damaging to the competition.
SCO can use legal means to get the court order lifted, but then they would have to show proof for their claims, which, it seems, they cannot.
Re:We can only hope (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, yes, I believe you are corrrect. Although it is a little more complex. They do not have to prove anything at this stage but just convince the judge(s). Whoever looses can then sue, but while an "Einstweilige Verf"ugung" can be gotten very fast, a court date can be many months in the future.
Of course if you do not def
Re:We can only hope (Score:3, Interesting)
How has the SCO FUD affected your relations with your clients both financially and in other business relation aspects?
Thats a good question, and is often answered with FUD of its own (both parties) or simply over generalized.
Our company (less than 25 stations) was beginning a migration before the FUD started. The boss approached me with concerns, and is warmer toward MS now. Our biggest concer
Re:We can only hope (Score:5, Informative)
Re:We can only hope (Score:5, Informative)
You were right if this fine was for messing around with the Linux community. This fine is only because SCO did not follow a preliminary injunction promptly. Certain statements were shown on sco.de *after* this injunction came into effect.
If you speak German, you might check out the original injunction (one of many) a this place here [univention.de].
Re:We can only hope (Score:5, Insightful)
Jackson a puppet of Microsoft? What are you on? Can I get some?
Jackson was the best thing that happened to Microsoft, Boies was the next best, but not by intention. Jackson was so gratuitously biased that there was no way the appeals court could possibly have backed his decision.
Having watched David Boies in action in the Microsoft, Florida and Napster cases I am convinced that his reputation is vastly over-rated. He was responsible for botching the Microsoft case, he fought the case on the weakest complaints, not the strongest ones. In Florida he let the Bushies roll right over him. His arguments in Napster were profoundly unconvincing.
Re:We can only hope (Score:4, Insightful)
Lets not forget this one, Boies is Lead Counsel for SCO.
Re:We can only hope (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:We can only hope (Score:5, Insightful)
>It seems utterly natural to me that Jackson would come out of the case with a severe distaste for [Microsoft]
And if he'd just had the simple bloody common sense to keep his comments to himself until after the case, that would have been fine. The problem was that he gave interviews during the case, in which he made his feelings clear. He quite literally pre-judged Microsoft. He was trolled, and he bit.
Re:We can only hope (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:We can only hope (Score:4, Interesting)
All they really might have to do is send the press releases from the US office.
Re:We can only hope (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:We can only hope (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:We can only hope (Score:5, Funny)
Re:We can only hope (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:We can only hope (Score:3, Funny)
Re:We can only hope (Score:4, Funny)
$10,800 USD seems a bit low
On the contrary! That's 15.45 Linux desktop licenses. Hey, imagine a Beowulf cl--just kidding.
I find it interesting that this came from Germany (Score:5, Informative)
I first noticed it with pro audio equipment. When a company quotes SNR stats at you about their pro sound card, it is almost always marketing BS. They quote you the SNR of the D/A or A/D converters themselves, not the effective SNR with all the supporting circutry taken into account. This is, of course, a more impressive number since the supporting circutry isn't perfect and degrades sound quality. This is accepted practise in the US, and is the same as chip companies quoting theortical Gflop numbers at you that you'll never see off of paper. Well, this isn't the case with any German card I've ever used. All the numbers are the no-bullshit, check-it-yourself, actul performance of the actual unit.
I suspect that's where this kind of injunction came from. LinuxTag said "They are lying about us in their ads (or offical company releases, same thing)" and the court said "Ok, SCO, you need to shut up until we have a hearing to determine the truth of your claims". SCO violated that order and is now in trouble for it.
Here it seems to more work that they can go around making claims UNTIL they are shown to be false, then they have to shut up.
Re:We can only hope (Score:5, Informative)
Re:We can only hope (Score:5, Insightful)
- There was a request for a preliminary injunction agains SCO in reference to claims SCO had made that were contested;
- They (SCO) were given the opportunity during the hearing for the preliminary injunction to show cause as to why an injunction should not be issued;
- More specifically, they had the opportunity to show that there was at least SOME factual basis to their claims (they were not obliged to present complete proof at this point, as it was just a prelim, just sufficient proof to allay a preliminary injunction) ;
- They declined to show ANY proof that there was any basis in fact for their claims;
- The court, upon failing to see any evidence that there was any legitimacy to SCOs claims:
granted the preliminary injunction
Remember that the level of proof required to avoid a preliminary injunction is low, and that SCO failed even that. SCO could have presented proof, requesting that it be sealed by court order, but they didn't. Why? The most reasonable assumption is that they are lying, that the proof doesn't exist, and that admitting to this would end their pump-and-dump scam.Look at the opposite case: if they HAD presented proof and the preliminary injunction had been defeated, Darl could have had a third volumn of press clippings to dump onstage boasting of his "relevance". Do you think such a press-hungry monkey wouldn't have jumped at the opportunity? In other words, they have been caught in a series of lies, and it's all starting to unravel. Any other interpretation is contrary to the evidence at hand :-)
Re:We can only hope (Score:4, Informative)
Because SCO GmbH Germany was
a) not allowed to do so by order of SCO Inc.
b) SCO Inc. did not give SCO GmbH Germany these small pieces of evidence.
(yes, I spoke to the SCO GmbH Germany CEO, see other thread for details)
The first part of your statement is perfectly right. I just want to add that
1. There were many requests for an preliminary injunction, not just by LinuxTag (and they all succeeded)
2. In all cases SCO has to be read: SCO GmbH Germany.
Re:We can only hope (Score:3, Interesting)
LinuxTag and Tarent did a good job exploiting the mess that this strategy caused the German operation, but that is all this is worth for the time being.
Karma Whoring (Score:5, Informative)
SCO Germany must pay 10,000 euro order money. Basis for the decision of the regional court Munich I is a provisional order of the enterprise Tarent and the LinuxTags against SCO. thereafter may not the enterprise not maintain, of Linux contains illegitimately acquired mental property of SCO. against it is to SCO on its homepage to have offended, why Tarent had requested an order procedure in June
The court accuses negligent behavior "according to a report of the Tarent GmbH SCO" with the enterprise of its firm homepage . There the statement is to have read be also after the provisional order that "final users, who use the software Linux for protection injuries of the mental property can be made liable by SCO".
Tarent lawyer Till hunter sees itself confirmed in the decision of the court that the statements of SCO as "substantial business-damaging expressions" are to be regarded, which concern a "extremely sensitive range". With unproven statements expense the expense third a business with the fear one make. With SCO Germany to time anybody for a statement cannot be attained; to request on a procedure stress Hans Bavarian, Managing director of SCO Germany, already beginning June opposite c't: "our intention was to hold back us conformal." The offence against the provisional order did not happen deliberately. ( anw
Mental property? (Score:2)
Mental Property? That's a new one. :-)
zRe:Mental property? (Score:2)
I copyrighted that thought in 1997. Pay up, sucka.
Re:Karma Whoring (Score:5, Informative)
More readable, human, translations of various articles and references to this story are available in the comments [userland.com] section of the write-up at Groklaw [weblogs.com].
Human Translation (Score:5, Informative)
According to a communication of Tarent Ltd. the court accuses SCO of "negligent actions" regarding its corporate homepate. It's supposed to have contained - even after the preliminary injuction - the claim that "endusers who use the software linux can be held responsible for violating intellectual property of SCO".
Tarent's lawyer Till Jaeger is of the opinion that the courts decision confirms that the behaviour of SCO is "massively economically damaging" which concern a "very sensible area". Business with fear on the back of third parties is made with unproven statements, continues Jaeger. Nobody could be reached for comment at SCO Germany; when a ruling had been requested at the beginning of June, Hans Bayer, CEO of SCO Germany, said: "It was our intention to conform to the preliminary injunction". The violation of the preliminary injunction had not been intentional.
Re: Even more Karma Whoring (Score:4, Informative)
SCO Germany has to pay a EUR 10,000 fine. This decision of the regional court of Munich I is based on [violation of] a provisional order of the enterprise Tarent and the LinuxTag against SCO. The order states SCO should cease making claims that Linux is violating SCO's Intellectual Property. It seems that SCO continued making such claims on their homepage, and therefore, in june Tarent asked the judge to impose a fine on them.
The court accused SCO of ignoring this order, because according to a report of Tarent, their homepage still contained statements such as "Linux end users can be held liable for infringement upon SCO's IP" - even after the provisional order was in effect.
Tarent's lawyer Till Jaeger is glad that the court has confirmed that SCO's expressions can be seen as "very damaging" to his company, especially because these claims have to do with very sensitive aspects of Linux development.
"These totally unproven claims cost other companies a lot of money, because people tend to get afraid (FUD)."
SCO can not be reached to comment on this matter.
In june, Managing Director Hans Bayer of SCO Germany said in an interview by C't [a well known and respected IT magazine in Germany and the Netherlands] that "his company intended to do exactly as the order stated. The violation was a mistake, it did not happen deliberately".
Disclaimer: Neither English nor German is my native tongue (and it shows
Babelfish Link (Score:5, Informative)
Not the amount (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Not the amount (Score:4, Informative)
The german LinuxTag is currently suing SCO german to forbid them to claim Linux contains illegal parts of Unix in Germany. As part of the procedure, a temporary injunction has been granted which orders SCO Germany not to use those claims until the matter is settled. SCO only failed to comply with this court order and has been fined for it.
Should LinuxTag lose the lawsuit, SCO can ask from them for damages resulting from the injucntion.
But in no way this has any relevance whether the claims by SCO are true or whether they're lying.
Re:Not the amount (Score:2)
*Chink* Chisel away (Score:5, Interesting)
Now, why would SCO germany pay, if they have SUCH a solid case??
Side Note: Babelfish is aptly named, the translations are usually Babble
Re:*Chink* Chisel away (Score:3, Interesting)
Of course it's aptly named... Babble comes from Babel which comes from "the Tower of" which comes from the Biblical story in which man tries to build a tower to heaven and God gets pissed and makes it so they can't understand each other and thus couldn't finish the tower.
Though given the origin of the name "Babelfish", then it is ironic that what comes -out- is babble.
But it does make me wonder if perhaps the Babelfish in HHGTT
OT: Babelfish in HHGTTG (Score:3, Informative)
No, if you've read the book, you'd know that the fact th
It's the principle that counts (Score:5, Informative)
Besides, I strongly suspect that a conviction in a German court will weigh heavily against SCO in other courts should this become a popular tactic.
Even a 1 EUR award would be a significant blow against SCO's position.
Re:It's the principle that counts (Score:2)
Are European courts really that tied together?
I know that, except for evidence presented, what goes on in courts in the US has no bearing on the court-judgement in Canada.
Shouldn't that be the way in Europe?
In other news (Score:5, Funny)
;)
Contempt of court? (Score:5, Funny)
Darl in a German prison. That thought makes me smile
Re:Contempt of court? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Contempt of court? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Contempt of court? (Score:5, Informative)
Yes, probably, but they don't continue to make those claims. The preliminary injunction is only against "The SCO Group GmbH," i.e. the German subsidiary, not against the US parent company. I've just looked at SCO Group GmbH's web site, and not found any claims about Linux, information about their Linux licensing or anything like that.
The fine that SCO has to pay now is because after the injunction against them was issued, SCO took offline their German web site, but when they put it back online their "letter to Linux users" was still published on the HTTPS version of the web site. SCO claims that the continued publication was a mistake. That was in June, more information can be found in this article [heise.de] (German).
The court has now decided that SCO was negligent in operating their web server, that's why they have to pay the fine.
What do you call 10,000 Euros? (Score:4, Funny)
bit like one of those "dead lawyer" jokes...
And the SCO Information Minister Says... (Score:3, Funny)
http://WeLoveTheSCOInformationMinister.org
---
FINED! for what? (Score:2)
If it is because what they are saying isn't true, based on what "proof"?
Don't get me wrong, I don't believe them either, but it isn't that simple in the courts.
Re:FINED! for what? (Score:5, Informative)
The are in violation of the injuction made against them spreading FUD while the case runs, which was brought about by linuxtag.
Re:FINED! for what? (Score:5, Informative)
The fact that SCO has still refused to show its proof is pretty good evidence to me that they don't have any.
Re:FINED! for what? (Score:5, Informative)
Basically, they have been told to "put up or shut up", and they did neither, hence the fine.
It does not mean that a court has found SCO is not telling the truth, it just means that if SCO want to continue making big statement, they need to accompanying evidence.
Yeah stick it to them. (Score:3, Interesting)
Come to think of it could every distro with a presence in Germany sue too.
Various national courts (Score:4, Insightful)
Of course, SCO/Caldera being an American company trying to enforce claims in a foreign country that doesn't (yet) have software patents might be partially why.
Re:Various national courts (Score:5, Informative)
Not really. There are laws against commercial disparagement in most of these United States and they have all passed constitutional muster. Commercial speech is subject to some constraints that political, artistic, journalistic and social speech are not because the objective of commercial speech is to make money whereas the purpose of most other forms of speech is to communicate facts and/or express ideas.
The reason SCO hasn't been hit with a preliminary injunction in the US is because nobody has asked for one. US courts like cases being "tried in the media" even less than European courts do.
Will they stop? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Will they stop? (Score:3, Informative)
> This German court has ordered the German division of SCO to stop making these claims. But what if the North American parent company continues making the claims? Is SCO Germany still liable?
Seems like you answered your own question to me.
Re:Will they stop? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Will they stop? (Score:5, Informative)
More Links (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=113
German:
http://www.pro-linux.de/news/2003/5909
This is not about material issues. (Score:5, Informative)
Bear in mind the order restraining them from making such claims is only a prelimenary injunction. That means all is still to play for, though the likelihood of a judgement against SCO Deutschland is very high indeed.
Re:This is not about material issues. (Score:5, Informative)
In Germany they have this weird concept that a seller liying in an advertisement is fraud, as the seller is misrepresenting the product.
In the USA, we are more enlightened than that, and judges have ruled that is quite Ok to lie (even when the company *knows* its lying) in an add as this constitutes free speech.
Re:This is not about material issues. (Score:3, Informative)
Generally is a merchant uses deceptive ads the advice you get is to contact the BBB, which has no enforcement powers, and is composed of other business folk. And which appearantly believes that the business is correct unless it's a blatant rip-off (e.g., not delivering purchased merchandise).
So I'll agree that the laws are
There is a funny game in Germany.. (Score:5, Interesting)
1. call the SCO HQ.
2. ask them about ther 'Linux end user license'.
3. The SCO person will answer "we can't tell you about this because a German court does not allow this."
4. pretend to be surprised.
5. hang up.
6. call again.
7. tell them that you actually read the preliminary injunction and it does not tell anything about the SCO-Linux-License.
8. ask again to send information about this SCO-Linux-License to you
9. listen to their suffering.
and so on.
I did it 4 times and the last time, they forwarded me to the CEO of SCO Germany. It's funny indeed.
My dictionary says that "schadenfreude" is also an english word.
Re:There is a funny game in Germany.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:There is a funny game in Germany.. (Score:3, Interesting)
Maybe the germans don't use it. "Zeitgeist" is another word that's more popular in english as well. To say nothing of "blitzkrieg".
According to (Score:5, Informative)
The Inquirer [theinquirer.net]:
Stephen
Re:According to (Score:3, Funny)
There is some justice in this world, (Score:5, Interesting)
Making these insane claims like they do is damaging Linux and the reputation of a lot of good people.
SCO needs to put up or shut up.
I hope to see a slew of counter suits filed against SCO and I hope a judge will order SCO to STFU until this is resolved. Anyone that loses money over this should personally sue SCO..
Re:There is some justice in this world, (Score:3, Informative)
Consumer rights. Ain't gonna happen.
In the EU, and even more so in north-western Europe, consumers have much more rights than in the US, and the proof of burden is typically on the companies and not the consumer. In this case, the company (SCO) made a claim against the consumer's rights, but could not, or could not yet provide a legal foundation for their claim. Thus the German court first gagged SCO from making the claims until/if they
Precis (Score:5, Informative)
SCO Germany got fined 10,000 EUR because they transgressed against an injunction ordering them to remove from their web page any allegation that Linux contained ill-gotten IP of SCO's. Apparently they overlooked something when cleaning up their pages.
However, there was no judgment on whether or not these allegations are correct, so put the champagne back in the fridge, guys.
Just https (Score:5, Informative)
Manual Translation (Score:5, Informative)
SCO Germany has to pay a 10000 Euro fine. This decision by the Landgericht Munchen I is based on a preliminary injunction against SCO, granted to the Tarent company and LinuxTag. According to it, SCO may not claim that Linux contains illegally obtained intellectual property from SCO. SCO has allegedly violated this on its homepage, therefore in June Tarent asked for a trial.
According to a Tarent GmbH statement, the court accuses SCO of "negligence" in running its company's homepage, which, even after the preliminary injunction allegedly read: "End users who use the Software Linux may be held liable for violations of SCO's intellectual property."
Tarent attorney Till Jaeger sees the court's decision as confirming that SCO's allegations are "massively business-damaging statements" concerning an "extremely sensitive issue." Unproven claims were used to do fear-induced business on the expense of others. SCO Germany is currently not available for comment. In early June, asked about the trial, SCO Germany CEO Hans Bayer emphasised: "Our intention was to comply." and that the violation of the preliminary incunction had not been intentional.
pcmag gives undeserved credibility to SCO (Score:5, Interesting)
From the Article
I was initially quite skeptical about these claims, but after talking with several of the principals in the case, I'm not so sure anymore. The history of SCO and Unix is complex.
That's when the copyright controversy emerged. Chris Sontag, a VP at SCO, recently visited PC Magazine's offices with a stack of documents he claims proves SCO's case. Some of these documents are compelling. Sontag explained that SCO owns the copyright to Unix System V. He said that through kernel 2.2, Linux was progressing fine under the GPL. But in the transition to kernel 2.4, code was added that violates SCO's copyrights.
Some of the evidence Sontag showed us is straightforward: Sections of the Linux kernel code relating to the journaling file system and multiprocessor support are identical to the Unix System V code. He offered to show us specific sections of the Unix code, but only under a nondisclosure agreement, which we refused. He said this code was not added to Linux by IBM but by someone else, and that it's a violation of SCO's copyright. I'm not a lawyer, but his argument seems convincing.
PC magazine may not be as relevant as it was a few years ago, but it is still where a lot of people get most of their computer news. I was pretty shocked to read this crap as the first story. I would encourage people to leave some feedback [pcmag.com] for Mr. Miller.
Re:pcmag gives undeserved credibility to SCO (Score:5, Insightful)
ZD is notoriously biased towards advertisers. Microsoft being one of their largest ones.
I was a subscriber to Computer Gaming World for years (it used to be by far the BEST gaming magazine) until ZD took over and they started giving glowing reviews to shit games (who advertised).
The old CGW would rip what deserved ripping.
Retarded (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:pcmag gives undeserved credibility to SCO (Score:3, Informative)
Also, this doesn't mention the concept of "public domain", of which the code they supposedly own is an implementation of such an algorithm. If the text is a copy/paste but the concept is directly school textbook, IANAL to determine how much value there is in their stuff anymore.
The details of the releases have been po
First Scientology.... (Score:4, Funny)
Death of a thousand cuts (Score:5, Informative)
Want to destroy SCO? Contribute to a Death of a thousand cuts [shu.ac.uk] by filing suit in small claims court. Only a 150,000 such suits should tap SCOX's [yahoo.com] market cap.
Babelfish Translation (a little funny of course) (Score:3, Interesting)
SCO Germany must pay 10,000 euro order money. Basis for the decision of the regional court Munich I is a provisional order of the enterprise Tarent and the LinuxTags against SCO. thereafter may not the enterprise not maintain, of Linux contains illegitimately acquired mental property of SCO. against it is to SCO on its homepage to have offended, why Tarent had requested an order procedure in June
The court accuses negligent behavior "according to a report of the Tarent GmbH SCO" with the enterprise of its firm homepage . There the statement is to have read be also after the provisional order that "final users, who use the software Linux for protection injuries of the mental property can be made liable by SCO".
Tarent lawyer Till hunter sees itself confirmed in the decision of the court that the statements of SCO as "substantial business-damaging expressions" are to be regarded, which concern a "extremely sensitive range". With unproven statements at expense third a business with the fear one make. With SCO Germany to time anybody for a statement cannot be attained; _ to request on a procedure stress Hans Bavarian, Managing director of SCO Germany, already beginning June opposite c't: "our intention was to hold back us conformal." The offence against the provisional order did not happen deliberately.
Best Nelson Voice warming up... (Score:5, Funny)
It's only $10,000, but it is a start. I guess this means the Heise/Boies/McBride/Sontag/Stowell show is on hold, eh? Either that or the poor German SCO Mgr. is off to jail.
I can imagine this in Utah:
McB: What is barratry?
Sontaggie: I dunno, I only do what I am told.
McB: (muttering below breath) Stupid, yes-man, marketroid (now shouting...) Lawyer, get out there and put a spin on this - now!
H: Well, if we do anything, then they may rise the fines or put someone in jail in Germany...
McB: So? I am in Utah! I want to sue every German now! Put out a press release! We declare Germany in violation of our Intellectual property, and they hate Mormons too!
H: I don't know how our German employees will...
McB: Somebody better get this written and in the German papers by this afternoon too.
H: But..
McB: But what? I am in Utah dammit. Stupid German Courts can't touch me. Bill G. hisself is backing my play, so shut up and do as I tell ya.
The above parody is provided via the Not Ready For Evidenciary Players. We enjoy bringing you this daily laugh at the lives of some really screwed up people.
SCO's Claims appeared on their website... (Score:3, Interesting)
manual translation (Score:5, Informative)
SCO must pay a monetary fine
SCO Germany has to pay a fine of 10'000 Euro. The basis for this ruling of the district court Munich I is an injunction (trans: a rather loose translation of "einstweilige Verfgung", a German legal term, and IANAL) of both the Tarent company and the LinuxTag exposition. According to this injunction, SCO may not allege that Linux contains illegally acquired intellectual property of SCO. SCO apparently violated this injuction on their home page, and for this reason, Tarent filed for legal court proceedings.
According to a press release of Tarent GmbH, the court blamed SCO to have behaved negligently in the operation of their company home page. Even after the injunction, the accusation that "end users who use the software Linux, can be held accountable for violations of intellectual rights held by SCO" could be read on the home page.
Till Jaeger, the lawyer representing Tarent, sees the court ruling as a confirmation that SCO's claims have to be considered as "massively damaging to business", and that they concern a "very sensitive area". At the expense of other parties, Unproven allegations are used to make money out of fear. Nobody at SCO Germany was available for comment at present; regarding the filing of legal court proceedings, Hans Bayer, CEO of SCO Germany, told c't already in the beginning of June: "Our intention was to comply with the ruling." He claimed that the violation against the injunction had not been deliberate. (anw/c't)
No word on FTC complaint... (Score:3, Interesting)
A short time ago I filed complaints with the FTC and with the WA state Attorney General's office regarding what I consider to be (at this time) false advertising, i.e., claims by SCO to provide some actual benefit in return for licensing fees. In my not-a-lawyer viewpoint, SCO can't make that claim in a solid way until the legal issues surrounding it are resolved; until then, they should at least be required to label the benefit as "speculative."
Haven't heard anything back on either complaint, nor do I necessarily expect to, although I know that SCO will receive a copy of it (at least from WA state if not the FTC). Not that they'll likely care unless the government agrees with my complaint and takes specific action accordingly...
Question: How does this affect the US website (Score:3, Interesting)
They've been hit by a court order in Munich which doesn't allow them to spread their FUD... again, I agree with this 100%
Question: does this only apply to servers in Germany or does this also apply to material located on US websites that those resident in Germany can access?
While on the SCO level I don't mind so much, but I can see some far reaching implications of this. Clearly the German goverment has some very diffrent attitudes are censorship then America as a past slashdot story has shown.
I'm sure it's possible to take reasonable measures that only specific countries can access specific web-pages which would solve the problem of possible legit forms of censorship aka court orders removing slander from infringing on other countries choice to make up their own minds.
Re:Overzealous regulators; let the market decide (Score:5, Insightful)
Get real. The free market is a myth. Every market has rules to stop negative behaviour (eg. lying about competitors products, engaging in monopolistic behaviour, running a protection racket) while allowing positive behaviour (eg. improving product, lowering prices).
Re:greedy yanks (Score:5, Insightful)
Europe are prepared to take a stand, and the US just sit back and let people / corporations make all the claims and have all the power they want.
This seems to be evident in the Microsoft Antitrust stuff, the Software Patents Issue and now the SCO case.
Glad I live in europe.
Re:Now let's watch... (Score:5, Informative)
http://biz.yahoo.com/z/a/s/scox.html [yahoo.com]
Re:German FUD-suppression system superior to USA's (Score:5, Insightful)
A cradle-to-grave welfare state is a beautiful thing. You're young, healthy and I presume able to have a decent insurance (or you haven't had the pleasure to fall through one of their loopholes yet), but you'll change your tone once you're no longer deemed "productive"...
I currently live in a country with US alike healthcare system, trying to undo some of the 1980's US foreign policy (El Salvador, look it up and weep) and we can't even get our housekeeper and her husband insured. They don't count, the (company-paid) doctors laugh at us. The most we've been able to do is insure her against accidents.
I'll be very glad to move back to Europe next year. Paying my taxes in full, knowing that I'll get it back somehow in education for my daughter, healthcare for my family, a gun-free environment and protection against poverty if we fall from grace.
I just can't believe most Americans think welfare is "liberal"... You just wait and see what happens when something unforseen happens. You'll wish your country (that is presumably you and others who vote) cared a bit more for people in general instead of success stories.