SCO Expands Licensing Money Chase Worldwide 466
drizst 'n drat writes "Article posted recently on ZDNet that 'companies outside the United States that use Linux now face the threat of legal action from the SCO Group, following the announcement on Wednesday that SCO's licenses are available worldwide.'" And cbiltcliffe writes "Vnunet is reporting that SCO is now threatening legal action against UK businesses that run Linux.
Yet again, they claim they're going to initiate legal action against Linux users 'within a couple of weeks.' (Funny...weren't they saying that back in September?)
They also claim that Novell and HP indemnification schemes are essentially useless (similar to SCO's Linux licences).
It definitely appears the media is getting somewhat wiser to the FUD, however, as the story reports 'The run-time licence only permits use of what SCO says is its IP,' rather than 'The licence permits use of SCO's IP' like we would have heard a couple of months ago."
Go Go Super WIPO (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Go Go Super WIPO (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Go Go Super WIPO (Score:2, Interesting)
If there is a ruling in the US against SCO... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:If there is a ruling in the US against SCO... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:If there is a ruling in the US against SCO... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:If there is a ruling in the US against SCO... (Score:3, Informative)
Perhaps you should try looking at a longer view [yahoo.com]. Short-term dips in stock prices are normal. There's nothing here to get excited about (yet).
Re:If there is a ruling in the US against SCO... (Score:4, Interesting)
--
Josiwe
Re:If there is a ruling in the US against SCO... (Score:3, Insightful)
The teller making $32000 a year is not going to have a clue what up with the boys in Investment Banking. These guys can make up to seven figures doing a job very few people in the population can understand. Bottom line: IB guys will never hear about it.
It would be more influential if you were a big retail investor, like a pension fund, and you said "you guys are facilitating a scam that is dicking around with
Let me suggest your first international effort (Score:5, Funny)
In related news... (Score:5, Funny)
SCO's IP (Score:3, Funny)
Idiotic Proposition? No thanks!
SCO's world tour (Score:5, Funny)
Re:SCO's world tour (Score:3, Insightful)
And going to Europe won't be any better. They still have some laws that work against crap like this last I checked.
(Germany for example shut SCO down)
I wonder what would happen ... (Score:3, Insightful)
I also wonder why it's aparently impossible to get a similar injunction in the US. I mean there should be a way to say "put up or shut up" in legalese in the US of A too.
Media (Score:2)
Yo Grark
Barratry.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Barratry.. (Score:2, Informative)
I think that was a pretty fair response to what was obviously flamebait.
Re:Barratry.. (Score:5, Informative)
In Scotland, Extortion (the obtaining of money or goods by means of illegitimate threats or demands) is a criminal offence. As a result, such practises as private firms clamping your car for parking on private property then demanding money to release it is illegal in Scotland but not in England. As a result, any Scottish company receiving one of these demands may wish to request a copy of the infringing source and if it's not forthcoming deem the request as an illegitimate threat and report SCO to the police.
In addition the new Proceeds of Crime Act gives police the power to seize all assets belonging to criminals participating in the practise of extortion. Such assets could include cars, houses, boats and bank accounts.
Re:What about the Republic of Ireland? (Score:2)
Re:What about the Republic of Ireland? (Score:2)
Er, you're quite wrong on that one. Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom. The Irish Republic, which is most of the land area of Ireland, is quite separate.
Re:Barratry.. (Score:5, Informative)
$60/month Colo'd Linux Sever [aktiom.net]
Re:Barratry.. (Score:5, Informative)
Damn right, first in the UK the loser pays the costs of both sides. SCO is a foreign corporation and could probably be required to put up a surety if they brought a claim.
Second and more interesting there is actually a tort in the UK that covers this exact type of case.
It is not a good idea to send out demand letters to a UK address unless you can substantiate the claim made.
The UK legal systen is not the place to start frivolous lawsuits unless you have no money to start with and so won't be worse off if you get made bankrupt.
Re:Barratry.. (Score:2, Interesting)
Actually, I think this is at the judges discretion. There have been libel cases where one side has won, but has been awarded 1p damages and told to pay costs, which is worse than losing!
Re:Barratry.. (Score:3, Informative)
There are two factors that come into this. The first is that a judge can refuse to award costs to a plaintif if they win an award that is derisory.
The second more interesting one is that the defendant can make an offer to settle for a particular sum. If the plaintif wins the case and the damages are less than or equal t
Re:Barratry.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Interesting--can you give a bit of background on this? The barratry thing doesn't apply until after SCO starts sueing aix or linux users, which probably won't happen. The general point I'm trying to make is that sueing or threatening to sue people for profit (hello Canopy Group) is a riskier endeavor in the UK than in the USA.
Re:Barratry.. (Score:4, Interesting)
From
As you can see, if SCO want to sell a license or contract within the UK, the seller (SCO) must specify the characteristics of the purchase. I.E. Specify what rights to what code is for sale/licensed under the contract. That can't be NDA'd either, as terms of sale are not allowed to be confidential.
IANAL etc.
What I don't understand... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:What I don't understand... (Score:4, Interesting)
So long as you don't specify whose legs it is that you're going to break, I'm afraid it probably is.
I don't believe for a moment that SCO is going to start suing anybody in the UK or anywhere else for that matter.
A quick check on Yahoo Finance shows that their stock has been dropping steadily over the last five days -- and is currently down some $2.50 from its price on Friday.
Whenever this happens, SCO simply issues yet another Press Release in order to justify their various backers' secret support of their stock price.
The various broker firms who are buying on behalf of a secret customer, *cough* Microsoft *cough*, are going to have to say they had some reason for buying when the SEC eventually investigates them. They can point to press releases like this and say:
Assets. (Score:3, Informative)
Titan Court
3 Bishop Square
Hatfield
Herts AL10 9NA
I don't know if they own their building or are renting, but surely there are some assets in it.
Re:Barratry.. (Score:5, Funny)
So, rather like the US really, except whereas we have Her Majesty, you (I believe) have someone called Bubba.
Goodness! The temerity! (Score:2, Interesting)
Especially since this can get you jail time in other countries, perhaps..?
Re:Goodness! The temerity! (Score:2)
Worldwide? (Score:3, Funny)
Ryan Fenton
Another day, another SCO story... (Score:5, Interesting)
Translation: we're not making enough cash from North America because they're not taking us seriously. So, we'll hit you guys up for a few bucks.
I really wonder if anybody in Europe will really take these guys seriously? Since SCO was sooooooooo successful in launching their lawsuits in the U.S., I'm sure they'll do just fine in Europe.
Re:Another day, another SCO story... (Score:2)
I'm definitely reading too much into this, but I thought it was kind of funny that this spokesman likes the word "fact," when facts are sorely missing from this case. Trying to make it sound like they have a more
Novell (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Novell (Score:5, Interesting)
SCO not only fails to act according to this simple logic, they taunt "more legal action" which just prolongs the course of when their suposed IP would be verifed. So, theoretically after IBM were to lose, they sue their next customer, and the chain would be very slow. You can run concurrently, but I would move that they are all related.
David Hasselhoff hired for salesman position (Score:2, Funny)
Translation (Score:5, Informative)
Translation: "We have them our ultimatum, and they gave us the finger!"
I hear... (Score:2)
Europe is more vigilant to Open Source (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Not the UK (Score:3, Interesting)
While the mainland, especially Germany, has been big on OSS, it seems the UK is more of a Windows shop than the USA is
I disagree; my last two jobs in London (one at Reuters, one at Univ. London) involved significant Linux use. The guy who ported Linux to the ARM architecture (Russell King) is English; I met him one evening when I took my A3020 Archimedes over to his house in a backpack, so he could iron out some bugs in a newly-ported 1.x kernel. And isn't Alan Cox Welsh?
SCO and Chucky Cheese's (Score:4, Funny)
Now it's just getting silly (er) (Score:2, Funny)
Not news really (Score:2, Interesting)
Well, in reality everyone has the threat of legal action looming over them. It may be entirely unwarranted, as in the SCO fiasco, but you can still go file suit against anyone for pretty much any goofy reason you can come up with.
I'm waiting calmly (Score:3, Interesting)
-3 days left.
(wtf?! -> soon we will know what court and IBM thinks about their 60-paged document...)
Already Happening (Score:5, Interesting)
As our last SCO server went into the trash a couple of years ago legal told us to ignore the letter and that's exactly what we did. Our three AIX machines continue to run as do our two Linux clusters, the only thing that's changed is the FUD from SCO.
Ed Almos
Budapest, Hungary
Re:Already Happening (Score:2, Insightful)
Ask the nice men from IBM who look after these wee beasties.
Ed
SCO Evidence (Score:2)
Who would every every buy anything from SCO (Score:2)
I can't wait till this is over.
Time for more "put up or shut up" (Score:5, Insightful)
Unless and until they can prove in a court of law that they really have these rights they claim, they cannot expect to be paid. On the contrary, they can expect to be investigated for fraud, an perhaps subject to criminal charges of extortion...
And trying to dodge the GPL does not count. Either the GPL is valid and must be obeyed, or it is invalid which makes everyone distributing Linux and other GPL'd software into copyright infringers. This latter seems somewhat less than likely...
Re:Time for more "put up or shut up" (Score:4, Interesting)
In Related News (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:In Related News (Score:2)
Re:In Related News (Score:4, Funny)
"We can't legally tell you to lie to customers, but it's pretty much the only way to make quota."
"Ladies and gentlemen of the jury. I'm not legally allowed to offer you large cash kickbacks for finding in favour of my client, but please take a moment to put your addresses on these envelopes."
-- quoted (badly) from Dilbert.
Re:In Related News (Score:3, Funny)
Judge: "What are you doing?"
Dogbert: "I'm trying to establish reasonable doubt."
Later
Judge: "Have you reached a verdict?"
Foreman: "We find the defendant innocent of all charges because we like little dogs who wear glasses. And we award a Maytag dryer to the juror Mary for winning the "Best Dressed
French companies' response to SCO threat letter (Score:5, Funny)
Dear silly CEO McBride,
I say NI to you. Your SysV was a hamster, and you SCOsource smells of elderberries. Now go go away or I shall taunt you a second time.
French Taunters, SARL
P.S. to legale departement: Fetchez la vache
The opening act of the finish (Score:5, Interesting)
This whole thing is just starting to piss me off, as they want it both ways, want everyone to lay down and pay them money for just sitting on their asses and thinking about ways to rule the world. They keep making these threats, but with the resulting 60 pages of docs they handed over, it is now being widely assumed that these guys are smoking some of the local meth (Utah has a HUGE meth industry).
One other note is that Sontag backtracked and said that this case is not a copyright case, but a breech of contract case. If that is true (who knows) then the ONLY entity that they could get money out of is IBM. They cannot go after an end-user using a contractual basis for their case, as the end user has no contract with SCO, much less any implied of such. They could go after under the basis of the copyrights, but then any end user could defer the case until after the Novell v. SCO copyright fight is over.
This sounds like a last gasp of desperation from SCO. They had to put out something to pump the stock, and what better way to say they going to get money from the whole world! What they do not realize is, just like a TV show killing off a main character to garner interest, this latest tact will prove to be opening act of their permanent cancellation.
Re:Confidence for Indemnification (Score:5, Interesting)
Indemnification is more like insurance than it is a warranty.
That means if you get sued for using the product, the distributor (or the person issuing the indemnification) will step in to take the bullet for you.
SCO, by virtue of it being a corporation, effectively indemnifies McBride, Stowell, et al. against individual prosecution for the company's misdeeds. There are ways, however, to "pierce the corporate veil" to go after individuals who are directly responsible for a company's misdeeds (as we are at very long last beginning to see with regards to Enron).
Hopefully that clarifies a bit...
I can't wait... (Score:2)
SCO are psychotic (Score:5, Insightful)
Blake Stowell is quoted as saying, "We've not introduced copyright infringement as part of our case with IBM. We've tried to make it clear that it's a contract issue."
Seems quite odd when a SCO press release from yesterday says exactly the opposite. Old Darl said this, "SCO is willing to enforce our copyright claims down to the end user level and in the coming days and weeks, we will make this evident in our actions." [yahoo.com]
What freakin planet are these guys from? I'm sorry, but I despise them like I despise neo-nazi, racists, thugs.
I'm sorry that I ever bought a Caldera product...
Re:SCO are psychotic (Score:3, Insightful)
Yet, in their Motion to Compel Discovery, they want to get AIX source code, etc. etc. from IBM in order to determine if there is a copyright violation therein.
In other words, they want IBM to send them the pond in order to see if there are any fish in it.
Now they are saying that they are not suing IBM in regards to a contract, er, a copyri
Re:SCO are psychotic (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:SCO are psychotic (Score:3, Funny)
Why do you have to insult Neo-Nazi, Racist, Thugs like that?
Re:SCO are psychotic (Score:3, Interesting)
How can they say that this case is over contract breach w/ IBM and in the same week demand (again) end users license their "IP" (which nobody has seen because, despite a court order, they will not produce it).
It's pretty obvious that they're in a tailspin now.
*LIAR* (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, if that's the case, then why did your attorney, on the record, in court, tell the judge, "I will proffer to the Court that we are filing a second amended complaint that has copyright infringement claims, and will be filed within the coming few days or no less than a week. And we'll put then fully in front of the Court the three buckets
Smack Down Time for SCO! (Score:2)
This is Getting Really Predictable (Score:5, Insightful)
That's what SCO is doing. They're pushing everyone. When they don't get enough attention, they make more threats. They keep threating more and more people and companies. As long as they can rant and rave, their stock stays high, but once someone (like IBM, hopefully) and kicks them down a notch, it'll all be over.
They know they have nothing. They know the only thing keeping their stock high is the bluster and fuss they keep making. They're reaching out as wide as possible to bully the schoolyard, the neighborhood, and, soon, the whole world. When they reach the end of people they can threaten, they'll have to act. If they had the strength to act and actually do something, they would. Since they don't, they're Shakespeare's idiot, telling a tale full of sound and fury signifying nothing.
I disagree (Score:5, Funny)
SCO isn't even that. They're the schoolyard bully wanna-be, that claims he can beat up anyone. But for some reason nobody actually *believes* he can, so in the end he has to set himself in respect. So he goes after the biggest, strongest kid on the block, the kind that noone wants to try to bully (IBM) and challenges him. And the other kids go "Whoa, if he can do that, he really must be strong."
Until he gets beaten into a small, bloody pulp.
Kjella
Global Competition (Score:2)
Thanks for the info (Score:4, Interesting)
In other news, I'll be phoning Trading Standards.
In how many different languages... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:In how many different languages...(Website) (Score:5, Interesting)
From the website [insultmonger.com]:
The UI is a bit overdone, but the data rocks...
Re:In how many different languages...(Website) (Score:3, Funny)
Vittujen kevat: Goddamn! (lit. Spring of the pussies!)
Suksi vittuun: Fuck off (lit. Ski into a cunt)
Aitisi nai poroja: Son of a bitch (lit. Your mother copulates with reindeer)
Quite creative those Finns.
Jedidiah.
Notice who the targets are. (Score:5, Insightful)
I predict one of four things will happen with the threatened lawsuits:
SCO shopping for an easer mark (Score:2, Interesting)
Then SCO can come back to the US and say something like "The evidence was enough to win the trial in Libya, it should be enough evidence to stand in the US."
In Soviet Russia ... (Score:2, Funny)
What about the middle east? (Score:3, Funny)
Gee the stock is (Score:3, Interesting)
SCO Japan (Score:2, Interesting)
I wonder how this SCO(US) move affect Japan.
Replacing SCOX with.... (Score:5, Funny)
IANAL; would like an attorney's opinion! (Score:3, Interesting)
And now, from the "demented conspiracy" section of *my* *brain*, comes the following twisted-beyond-repair illogic:
1) SCO has, so far, *threatened* lawsuits against US users, but hasn't actually followed through yet because (I surmise) they know they'll lose.
2) (Lawyer, please!) If SCO files a suit in a US court against an entity who fails to show up to defend themselves (like, say, some dude from the UK where US law does not apply and who, therefore, doesn't give a rat's ass about paying to put high-priced attorneys on a plane to Utah), then SCO wins, right?
------------
3) Therefore, SCO's strategy is to get some quick default wins in court against defendants who won't show up to get some quick PR validation so they can move forward with the sale of the company and assets.
Is this stretching it maybe?
Re:IANAL; would like an attorney's opinion! (Score:3, Informative)
Please copy and distribute prosecute-sco.html (Score:5, Interesting)
-
Let's Put SCO Behind Bars [goingware.com]
From the page: Thank You For Your Attention.What SCO May Be Thinking - A Thought Experiment (Score:5, Interesting)
I assume that we have two sides here. One side says "show us the infringing code".... on the theory that in order to demonstrate copying you have to show more or less a letter perfect copy...
I assume that SCOs game is to get inside of the sausage making process and to demonstrate that even though the code is not literally system V you can trace a "legacy" that involves the gradual modification of ideas expressed in one form to ideas expressed today in Linux, and that by linking the people who worked on code to its evolution over time through evidence derived from the discovery process, they will make the case that current Linux code is derived from code that they claim to own. The continuity of people may be part of making the case of continuity of "ideas" and thus of "ownership."
From this perspective (IANAL, etc.) I would think that all of the moaning about how Linux code isn't exactly, or aproximately, Unix code is really beside the point. IBM would of course like to keep it at that level, arguing "if the glove does not fit you must aquit", eg. if this code isn't exactly the copyrighted code then they have no case.
But my understanding of the law (limited and amateur as it is) is that SCO would have a case to make if the concepts ideas, "manner of expression" and all sorts of other stuff in Linux could be shown to be derived through a chain of modification, backed up by the ongoing involvement of individuals in that modification process, even if the code and expression of programing ideas took a very different letter by letter form.
So if they can get inside of IBM records they can begin to stitch a winnable case together, while if the "Match code or acquit" theory holds then the case is over. So if they can satisfy the initial requests enough to make the judge open up IBM to their SCO discover, then they can begin to make the case.
Anyway that's my effort to understand what SCO might be thinking and why this might make more sense than we'd like it to make.
They are scum, but let's not assume that they are stupid scum.
Copyright doesn't work the way SCO wants it to (Score:3, Informative)
Nice theory, BUT ... ideas can't be copyrighted, and we know SCO holds no patents. Their only possible "IP" is copyrights on code. Even if there was a cl
SCO isn't thinking! (Score:3, Interesting)
Go to Groklaw [groklaw.net] and read the Asset purchase agreement yourself. You can see first hand, just how full of shit SCO is, and exactly what rights they have.
Novell never sold any patents to SCO, that is blatantly written in the asset purchase agreement. SCO probably has few if any copyrights to Unix, the document describes copyright transfer conditions, which SCO has not met. SCO and N
They ARE stupid scum, though (Score:4, Informative)
What you're describing is known as a "fishing expedition", and is generally frowned upon when bringing a lawsuit. The judge in this case apparently understands this, which is why she decided that SCO has to show all of their cards first before the judge will decide on SCO's Motion to Compel Discovery.
In case you've forgotten, here are some of the questions that SCO must answer before they get a shot at IBM:
INTERROGATORY NO. 1: seeks specific identification of all alleged trade secrets and confidential or proprietary information that SCO alleges IBM misappropriated or misused. This information is requested by product, file and line of code.
This means that IBM wants SCO to show show which parts of Linux are deemed to be infringing, "by product, file and line of code". This is "The Code" that followers of the suit have been waiting for since at least March.
INTERROGATORY NO. 2: For each alleged trade secret and any confidential or proprietary information identified in response to Interrogatory No. 1, Interrogatory No. 2 seeks further identification of: (a) all persons who have or had rights to the same; (b) the nature and sources of SCO's rights in the same; and (c) efforts to maintain secrecy or confidentiality of the same.
This is IBM saying "For each item you identified in answer to the first question, we want to know who else can claim rights that information, the exact nature of any agreements between that entity and SCO, and what efforts were made on both parts to keep it a secret." (Novell, maybe?)
INTERROGATORY NO. 3: For each alleged trade secret and any confidential or proprietary information identified in response to Interrogatory No. 1, Interrogatory No. 3 seeks the identity of all persons to whom the same was disclosed and the details of such disclosure. In particular, this interrogatory seeks: (a) the date of disclosure; (b) the terms of disclosure; (c) the documents relating to disclosure; (d) all places where the trade secret and/or confidential or proprietary information may be found or accessed.
This is IBM saying "For each of the items you identified in answer to the first question, we want to know who all you've shown that information to, when you showed it to them, why you showed it to them, all documentation relating to that disclosure, and any place where that information can be found." Remember, SCO not only charges that SCO's IP got into Linux against their wishes, but that IBM did it. IBM wants to see SCO's evidence that is had to be IBM and couldn't be someone else.
As far as what SCO wants this case to be about, SCO has contradicted itself on so many occasions that it's impossible to say with any certainty what SCO is suing over. We've gone from Darl McBride saying, on [com.com] several [com.com] occasions, [itweek.co.uk] that there is "line-by-line" copying of UnixWare code into Linux. But somehow we've gotten to the point where they're trying to tell the court that they can't possibly find has been infringed until they get their response from IBM.
So if you will excuse me, I will continue to believe that SCO are stupid scum, because they've not shown any evidence to the contrary.
Jay (=
(I'm not a lawyer either; if you're coming to
Wordlwide? (Score:3, Funny)
Ring ring: Halo, Suse Deutschland.
SCO: Pay up nazi scum!
Suse Deutschland: Ficken sie SCO.
Suse Deutschland: Click.
SCO: . . . . . . . Damn.
Look ! A press release ! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:useles (Score:2)
Re:Correct me if I'm wrong (Score:2)
Re:Correct me if I'm wrong (Score:2)
Re:Correct me if I'm wrong (Score:3, Funny)
SCO has produced much evidence of their agenda and intellect over the past year or so.
Did anybody else have their browser hang ... (Score:2)
Re:Correct me if I'm wrong (Score:3, Informative)
Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant SCO hereby files its Notice of Compliance with this Court's Order entered on December 12, 2003, and states:
1. SCO has responded fully and in detail to Interrogatories 1-9, 12 and 13 of IBM's First Set of Interrogatories. (See SCO's Supplemental Response to Defendant's First and Second Set of Interrogatories dated January 12, 2004) (hereinafter "Supplemental Responses."). These Supplemental Responses, which exceed 60 pages, fully respond to the in
Re:Correct me if I'm wrong (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Do we care? (Score:5, Funny)
Fick dich Darl
Vaffanculo Darl
que te jodan Darl
Vas te faire foutre Darl
vai-te foder Darl
Ay Gamisou Darl
Knep dig selv Darl
stop het in je nauwe gaatje Darl
k chortoo Darl
cachau bant Darl
sa-mi sugeti pula Darl
haista paska Darl
poq gai Darl
spierdalaj Darl
yebem ti mrtwu mater Darl
bazd meg a picsadat Darl
popusis mi krac krasni Darl
siktir lan Darl
ebi se v guza Darl
Do prdele Darl
mine vittu Darl
lech lehizdayen Darl
achike Darl
jebi se Darl
Re:Media Skepticism based off community skepticism (Score:3, Insightful)