Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Caldera Government The Courts News

Darl Goes to Harvard 425

Posted by michael from the okay,-who-forgot-the-tomatoes dept.
colinmc151 writes "Both Groklaw and Internet News are reporting on the visit made to Harvard University by Darl McBride, SCO president and CEO, and Chris Sontag SCO senior vice president. Darl and Chris made a presentation titled 'Defending Intellectual Property Rights in a Digital Age'. One protester gave out copies of Linux to all that attended. Bottom line SCO plans to carry on with the lawsuits. Best line was one student who when Darl asked if he was impacted by MyDoom.A e-mail virus answered 'No, I use Linux'." One MIT student has a write-up of the event as well...
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Darl Goes to Harvard More

Darl Goes to Harvard

Comments Filter:

  • Oh Darl, when will you ever learn? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by __aavhli5779 ( 690619 ) * on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @01:49PM (#8171895) Journal
    Erica's question (the second to last, as McBride claimed "that girl really wants to ask a question") was "You've said you like the GPL, that you distribute GPL products, and that people should be able to contribute however they want. Why then did you claim in December that you believe the GPL violates the constitution, and US patent and trademark law?"


    McBride's response was essentially "look, over there, something shiny! next question!"


    Seems like the MIT students did a nice job putting him on the spot, but it's obvious that ol' Darl is pretty adept at deflecting any criticism or challenging questions and changing the subject when he finds the current one uncomfortable.

    What will it take to get him to address all the contradictory statements and lies [welovethes...nister.org] that he and his cohorts seem to spout at every opportunity?

    Perhaps it's time to try to get that court date pushed up :)

  • There's one student... (Score:5, Funny)

    by bc90021 ( 43730 ) * <bc90021&bc90021,net> on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @01:50PM (#8171911) Homepage
    ...who will see his tuition go up by $699 next year. ;)

  • Not a bad idea (Score:3, Interesting)

    by phaetonic ( 621542 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @01:50PM (#8171921)
    Go to Harvard, spread FUD, gain support from future investors/business people and hope they support SCO in the future, if SCO is still around.

    • Re:Not a bad idea (Score:4, Interesting)

      by AKnightCowboy ( 608632 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @02:19PM (#8172298)
      Go to Harvard, spread FUD, gain support from future investors/business people and hope they support SCO in the future, if SCO is still around.

      I never bought any SCO products and after the childish behavior they've displayed in handling this situation, I never will. If by some miracle they're given the power to decide on the fate of Linux I will wipe every system I have and put FreeBSD on it. SCO will never receive one nickel from me or any company I support.

  • What kind of students were they? (Score:5, Funny)

    by halivar ( 535827 ) <bfelger@gmai l . com> on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @01:51PM (#8171934)
    Law or CS students? Either way, he should've been laughed off stage.

    Maybe he was speaking to fashion merchandising students (it is a nice suit, after all).

    • Re:What kind of students were they? (Score:5, Informative)

      by LargeMythicalReptile ( 531143 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @02:17PM (#8172283)
      Law or CS students? Either way, he should've been laughed off stage.
      Speaking as one of the students there, I'd say there was a good mix of both. I went with a group of friends from MIT, all of whom were CS or related fields. We sat in front of two former-techie-turned-BU-law students and a non-student geek. However, not surprisingly, there were a significant number of Harvard law students there as well.

      As for being laughed off the stage, I don't think anyone in the audience really bought SCO's claims. The audience was realistically fairly polite, but unsympathetic--no one was outright laughing at him, but no one agreed with him either.

      As for the presentation itself, at its core, Darl seemed to say a few reasonable things--they claim ownership of a certain body of IP and that IBM distributed that IP illegally. Both of those claims are under contention, but he stated that that's for the courts to decide. This, to me, seems perfectly reasonable--I may not agree that SCO has a case, but they obviously think they do, and the courts are the proper forum to determine this.

      If it were just the contract dispute, I don't think there would be this violent reaction against SCO. It's all the FUD that comes with it--from "The GPL is unconstitutional" to "Linux gives computing infrastructure to terrorists, cyber- and otherwise"--that is causing the problem. We told Darl as much after the talk (no matter what you think of the man, it was cool to have the opportunity to talk with him face-to-face), and he seemed somewhat receptive to the fact that we're not all IP-hating copyright-hating hippies, we just don't like the FUD. Frankly, I don't think anything will come of that--it's too late to retract the many things that have been said, and PR will probably keep him on the same path--but there was a glimmer of hope, at least.

      • Re:What kind of students were they? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by lambadomy ( 160559 ) <lambadomy@diediedieCOMMA.com minus punct> on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @02:30PM (#8172438)
        I don't know, I think that this is mixed in with the on-going backlash against corporate litigation, ridiculous patents, and CEO compensation. People feel that SCO has no case, and that while the courts may be the place to sort it out, if SCO loses and the lawsuit is shown to be ridiculous absolutely nothing will happen to the architects of the lawsuit. Darl will make a lot of money, all for playing with the law. This is a nation steeped in the mantra of accountability, regardless of recent flirtations with "political correctness", but in cases like these it is hard to see. There is a real fear that even if/when Darl and SCO lose, they will have won, and that any company can take a similar nothing-to-lose roll of the dice with other peoples money.

        • Re:What kind of students were they? (Score:5, Interesting)

          by abe ferlman ( 205607 ) <bgtrio&yahoo,com> on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @03:44PM (#8173401) Homepage Journal
          Well, let's be clear, there will be a loser: Microsoft. They're obviously behind this for two reasons:

          1. The bulk of SCO's funding since the beginning of the lawsuit has been from Microsoft
          2. Microsoft has softened their public FUD about linux. They're trying to let someone else play bad cop because they know when they criticize linux unfairly it makes others jump to the defense of linux AND blame Microsoft- when someone else does it for them, the first still happens but the second does not.

          It's obvious to informed observers, but not to the press.

          The winner so far seems to have been Novell though - people are beginning to see that they are being unfairly maligned, their stock has been climbing like gangbusters.

          • They're obviously behind this for two reasons: ..

            2. Microsoft has softened their public FUD about linux. They're trying to let someone else play bad cop because they know when they criticize linux unfairly it makes others jump to the defense of linux AND blame Microsoft- when someone else does it for them, the first still happens but the second does not.

            While it is true that MS have stopped piping on their anti-Linux horn quite so much since SCO have been up to their mischief, it could of course be becau

      • Re:What kind of students were they? (Score:4, Informative)

        by Camel Pilot ( 78781 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @04:50PM (#8174192) Homepage Journal
        No! it is not the FUD that really tans my hide. It is the blatant heavy handed attempt to hijacking a large body of work, developed by others, as their own.

        He is quite aware that no SCO IP resides in Linux. This man is a thief or at best a con man.

      • I disagree with a line in the writeup [1] related to what you're saying [2]:

        1. "Darl repeatedly returned to the issue of their IP being in linux, which I think is a very very valid point. ... He looked taken aback -- the people, who came with such a strong set of opinions against SCO, were saying that they agreed with the root of their case... But the message was getting lost amongst all their constant BS."

        2. "he seemed somewhat receptive to the fact that we're not all IP-hating copyright-hating hippies,

    • Re:What kind of students were they? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by jefe7777 ( 411081 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @02:53PM (#8172750) Journal
      from reading this page:

      http://web.mit.edu/jonas/www/faim/

      here's a choice quote that is very important to me:

      "This isn't a group of crazy commie hippies who want to destroy their business model(SCO's), but rather, we're engineers and scientists (and law students) who recognize that they may have a valid claim, but tune them out when they(SCO) make irrational statements."

      and SCO sure does make a LOT of those irrational comments eh?

      SCO _is_ irrational. And if we can keep discrediting them with calm cool logic, and not froth at the mouth, we'll make headway.

      Awesome job guys! You guys are role models on how to handle FUD.

  • Anything you say will be taken down and used ..... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Performer Guy ( 69820 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @01:52PM (#8171944)
    Daryl doesn't seem to be aware that his public comments may impact the trial. It's like the guy genuinely doesn't care about th eendgame as many here have observed.

    It must be pretty frustrating for Linux contributors to be attacked by a guy who is using the fruits of their labors on his own Linux system.

  • Whoaa (Score:4, Funny)

    by savagedome ( 742194 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @01:52PM (#8171945)
    Darl Goes to Harvard

    Did anybody else shudder at the thought! :)

  • Forgot the subtitle (Score:5, Funny)

    by daeley ( 126313 ) * on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @01:53PM (#8171957) Homepage
    Hey, the poster forgot the subtitle for the presentation: "Defending Intellectual Property Rights in a Digital Age, or How to Make Money Without Really Trying"

  • Excellent! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by DrugCheese ( 266151 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @01:53PM (#8171964)
    We should organize more protests involving the giving away of free software.

    Now if they threw pig blood at them it would've made mainstream news. But something good and worthwhile to humanity? that's not news

  • The Important Part (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @01:54PM (#8171974)
    Lowest stock price for SCOX since August 2003.

    http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=SCOX

    At $13.54 at time of this posting, and has even gone down so low as $13.18 for the day range.

    -Joshua

  • The part I do not understand... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by John Seminal ( 698722 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @01:54PM (#8171979) Journal
    McBride said that while Linux is the compilation of thousands of people donating their time and programming skills to improve kernel code created by Linus Torvalds, SCO deserves compensation for the improvements it made to Linux.

    I thought that the whole point of open source is so nobody can take the software, change it, and then sell it as their own. I thought any changes made became the property of the project, for everyone to use.

    For example, in the GPL it states:

    You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License.

    • SCO got compensation (Score:5, Insightful)

      by nuggz ( 69912 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @02:06PM (#8172148) Homepage
      SCO got compensation for the work they submitted to the Linux kernel.
      Their compensation was a licence to use and distribute all the other code.

      • Close, but it's more specific than that. The compensation they received for distributing their code under the GPL was the same compensation anybody gets for distributing code under the GPL - the guarantee that the licensee will have to release any of their modifications and improvements to SCO's code under the GPL. So SCO got to benefit from others' contributions and improvements to their contributed code, such as the linux-abi code that they developed and released to improve compatibility between Linux a

    • Re:The part I do not understand... (Score:5, Informative)

      by GTRacer ( 234395 ) <gtracer308@@@yahoo...com> on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @02:08PM (#8172181) Homepage Journal
      ...nobody can take the software, change it, and then sell it as their own.

      Yeah, but IIRC, Darl is claiming someone took SCO IP, stuck it in Linux code, and distributed it as GPL, when in fact the code wasn't supposed to have been released. SCO then sued a bunch of Linux users.

      IBM called shenanigans, and one objective of the upcoming trial is to have SCO show just what code they claim is theirs, and so other kernel coders have a chance to defeat the claim on prior art or somesuch.

      GTRacer
      - IANAL

    • Not necessarily (Score:4, Informative)

      by Wudbaer ( 48473 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @02:13PM (#8172234) Homepage
      I thought that the whole point of open source is so nobody can take the software, change it, and then sell it as their own.

      This applies fully only to GPL and closely related licenses. BSD-like licenses enable people to do exactly this while IMO still being open source licenses. Open source != Open Source.

  • The Abbreviated Text (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Scoria ( 264473 ) <slashmail AT initialized DOT org> on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @01:54PM (#8171981) Homepage
    'Defending Intellectual Property Rights in a Digital Age'

    "Rather than go out and just say, 'Let's go sue everybody now,' we're coming out with a well-thought-out program." - excerpted from WLTSIM [anerispress.com]

  • Find the SCO Source Code (Score:4, Funny)

    by kidgenius ( 704962 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @02:00PM (#8172070)
    Linux Stole SCO Cod [linuxstolescocode.com]

  • I saw this back in the 80's (Score:4, Funny)

    by dustwun ( 662589 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @02:01PM (#8172082) Homepage
    When it was called Ernest goes to Jail.
    This is akin to reading the details of a year long train wreck. I somehow feel dirty every time I read the next SCO news.

  • The tuition bill (Score:3, Funny)

    by AtariAmarok ( 451306 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @02:01PM (#8172093)
    "Mr. McBride, that will be $699 per credit hour"

  • Great job, Eric Jonas, but... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Muad'Dave ( 255648 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @02:01PM (#8172096) Homepage

    What I want to know is what do Erica and Clare look like? Pics, dammit!

  • Classic! (Score:3, Funny)

    by pb ( 1020 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @02:04PM (#8172122)

    At one point, McBride, explaining what he thinks is the Linux community's efforts to damage SCO through Web site attacks, asked a student whether he was affected by the MyDoom.A e-mail virus, which targeted Outlook and Outlook Express users and installed malicious code used to launch a massive distributed denial of service attack (define).


    The attack, which began over the weekend and culminated Sunday, swamped SCO's home page domain name and forced the company to move it to another Monday morning.

    When asked the question, the student replied with a hint of humor in his tone: "No, I have Linux."

    It's great to see anecdotes like this making it into the media. :)

  • Groklaw /.ed already? (Score:5, Informative)

    by zaba ( 746842 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @02:07PM (#8172162) Journal
    I can still get it (though it's getting slow), so here ya go:

    Darl Goes to Harvard - My First Quick Impressions
    Monday, February 02 2004 @ 08:48 PM EST

    I watched the webcast and while I lost the stream once or twice, I heard the bulk of it. No doubt others will fill in the blanks, and I took some pictures off the screen which will at least give you a flavor when I get them up. Soon.

    The big news is that they say they will start to sue copyright end users by February 18. The other news is that he asked the audience if they had gotten infected by MyDoom, and he pointed to one guy who beautifully answered, "No, I use Linux, so I wasn't affected," and the room laughed. Darl wasn't happy about that and it was clear he didn't like the questions about the ABI files. He said that Linus claimed only two, and there were the rest they can sue over, though they still plan to contest Linus' claims in court.

    Someone mentioned an article that had lessened his credibility on the other ABI files, that it had said it looked like they had distributed them under the GPL. And it was like he turned dark and stormy and paced and tried not to show his anger. But it showed. Then he said that the BSDi settlement was about those same header files, and they know what is in that sealed settlement and we don't, but there were three kinds of files addressed in that settlement: files that had to be removed, files that had to have copyright notices put on them, and files that were ok. They claim that the files they will be suing over lack the copyright notices, plus some files that were supposed to be removed, IIRC. And the DMCA says it's a violation to strip off copyright information, so I gather they intend to go after end users for "stripping off" copyright information on those header files. Ridiculous and cynical as that may sound, that is their strained plan. No doubt they figure the DMCA gives them muscles that AT&T didn't have back when the original case was before the courts. But those are the files. Sontag hinted that they might add copyright claims to the IBM case over those same header files at some point.

    My overall impression was that they were very uncomfortable. It began with calls for civility, which turned out not to be necessary. Everyone was polite. But clearly Harvard had gotten a lot of complaints, judging from their remarks. They have invited Chris Stone of Novell to speak there in three weeks on February 23. Details will be on their website.

    They continued to repeat the same untrue "facts" about the GPL, that it forces you to give your software away free, blah blah. I hardly think explaining it one more time will help them, since it's clearly volitional. They've got their story and they're sticking to it. Darl said when you go to court, the rubber hits the road. I assume he means by that you have to get it actually sorted out with facts. He was asked how he can sue without having established copyrights, but he danced around without answering that directly. No doubt that rubber will hit the road when he sues the first end user.

    Clearly they have something in that settlement agreement, which Noorda was a party to, and the rest of us were not, and they plan on springing it on a startled and totally innocent end user soon, who will be befuddled as to how he is responsible for complying with a sealed agreement he isn't a party to and doesn't have a clue what it says. Of course, they don't tell you what it says. They would rather surprise you. Well, good luck, cowboys. We'll see how it plays in a court of law.

    He tried to answer Eben Moglen's illustration about going to Barnes and Noble and buying a book and having SCO leap into your living room and say, I'm suing you for reading that book. He said it's more like you get the book without paying for it and then you make copies and give them to 500 friends. He said that is how it is with Linux. Companies get one copy and make tons more. The part he misses is that the writers of the code have no problem with that,

  • Evil is afoot (Score:5, Funny)

    by paiute ( 550198 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @02:15PM (#8172263)
    Darl goes to Harvard. Gates went to Harvard. When you are at MIT, you come to realize that evil lives up the river. Like they built over a fucking Indian graveyard or something. Kissinger? Hearst? Updike? Kaczynski? Love Story? Hello?

  • Tomorrow, the judge rules (Score:5, Informative)

    by Animats ( 122034 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @02:17PM (#8172281) Homepage
    Tomorrow, the judge rules on whether SCO has "identified with specificity" the alleged infringements.
    • Magistrate Notice of Hearing [uscourts.gov]
      Motion hearing set for 10:00 2/6/04 for all pending motions: ... To be held before Judge Wells.
    SCO has already been ordered by the judge to comply. That happened back in December. The order is below. Notice item 4. Tomorrow, the judge rules on whether they did comply.
    • Order granting [68-1] motion to compel discovery, granting [44-1] motion to compel Discovery.

      The SCO Group is hereby ORDERED:

      • 1) To respond fully and in detail to Interrogatory Nos. 1-9 as stated in IBM's First Set of Interrogatories.
      • 2) To respond fully and in detail to Interrogatory Nos 12 and 13 as stated in IBM's Second Set of Interrogatories.
      • 3) IBM is to provide SCO a list of requested documents as stated in IBM's First and Second Requests for the Production of Documents and SCO is to produce all requested documents.
      • 4) To identify and state with specificity the source code(s) that SCO is claiming form the basis of their action against IBM. This is to include identification of all Bates numbered documents previously provided.
      • 5) To the extent IBM's requests call for the production of documents or are met by documents SCO has already provided, SCO is to identify with specificity the location of responsive answers including identification of the Bates numbered documents previously provided if applicable.
      • 6) If SCO does not have sufficient information in its possession, custody, or control to specifically answer any of IBM's requests that are the subject of this order, SCO shall provide an affidavit setting forth the full nature of its efforts, by whom they were taken, what further efforts it intends to utilize in order to comply, and the expected date of compliance. SCO is required to provide such answers and documents within thirty days from the date of this order. All other discovery, including SCO's Motion to Compel is hereby STAYED until this Court determines that SCO has fully complied with this Order.

    In that one line of boldface above, the judge captured the key issue. No amount of PR spin control will help SCO in court tomorrow.

    • Re:Tomorrow, the judge rules (Score:4, Funny)

      by jrumney ( 197329 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @03:38PM (#8173322)
      Tomorrow, the judge rules on whether SCO has "identified with specificity" the alleged infringements.

      So you're the one who was DoSing SCO's website 2 days early.

  • 'No, I use Linux' (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mumblestheclown ( 569987 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @02:20PM (#8172321)
    Funny, I use Linux too, and nevertheless mydoom affects me substantially. for example, my ISP's mail servers are slow as hell because of this crap. So slow, that I couldn't even get to my mail for much of today.

  • CItation for the record (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Performer Guy ( 69820 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @02:23PM (#8172359)
    "..claims that a member of the linux community claimed that a high-level linux hacker was responsible for at least one of the attacks (I'd love to see that citation). "

    This was Eric Raymond acting as self appointed champion and bull in a china shop during an earlier attack.

    http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2003- 08 -25-010-26-NW-CY-LL&tbovrmode=3

    Personally I think Eric Raymond is a darned fool for saying 'we' etc as if this was a community effort. Eric saying he's ashamed for us all plays right into SCO's hands. This was not the community, it was one lone criminal acting for themselves. Presenting it as something else is both inaccurate and damaging.

  • Full writeup text, (site slashdotted.) (Score:3, Informative)

    by Andreas(R) ( 448328 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @02:24PM (#8172368) Homepage
    Free as in Maaah!
    Or, My Chat with Darl McBride
    see, "Free as in Speech" vs "Free as in beer" are different types of freedom. The Cheat goes "Maaah!"

    2 February 2004

    Those of you who know me know I don't miss lab on a whim. But when Erica zephyred me saying that Darl McBride (head of SCO) was speaking at Harvard, I knew we had to do something. Our first thought was, in proud MIT tradition, a hack. May be water balloons, maybe paper airplanes. But hacks are hard to do without causing some sort of damage, and these people have proven that they are willing to sue everyone in sight.

    Our obvious choice, then, was to provide anti-FUD. Based on help from people on my zephyr class, we assembled a nice set of flyers full of pro-Linux and pro-GPL information. We figured that, as this was a talk put on by the Harvard Journal of Law and Technology, the audience would mostly be lawyers. Maybe they've never heard of the GPL? Maybe they think Linux is some sort of furry pet?

    So we made up these flyers. They were all done in Adobe Illustrator under Windows (Oh, the irony!) but looked really professional. Above all, we wanted to go and present the non-RMS, non-crazy-anti-IP side of linux. We even dressed up.

    * What Is Linux
    * SCO vs Open Source : A timeline
    * Quotations between SCO, Linus, and the FSF

    Oh, and in each packet of information (in a nice little folder, might I add) we included a burned copy of Knoppix 3.3 (which Erica and I stayed up late last night mass-producing in an Athena cluster). Knoppix is great because 1. it's only a single CD and 2. it'll let non-linux-users try linux without any potential risk.

    The Handout
    We decided to leave Fourth East at around 5:00 or so. Some people would be late, but in the end we had myself, Erica, Dave W, Vimal, Javier, Clare, and Ike there. We took up a whole row in the room (which, by the way, was beautiful -- Harvard has some nice buildings!)

    At around 6:05 (the talk was scheduled to begin at 6:30) we decided to get started. Our 60 handouts, complete with Knoppix CDs, were ready. Erica and I went out in front of the auditorium, and Clare et. al. stayed behind, to hand them out to people already inside. Upon meeting some people from the Journal, they admitted that they knew Darl would be a contentious speaker, and simply asked that we tell people that we were in no way affiliated with the journal or Harvard.

    Our speech went something like "Hi, we're not affiliated with this talk in any way, we're just a group of concerned MIT students who have some information about Linux, the GPL, and SCO that we'd like to provide to perhaps counter some of the claims that will be made by the speaker tonight." Only one person said no to a handout. Several said that we were "preaching to the choir", others admitted to having run linux for many years.

    The Talk
    Once the talk begin, Darl introduced himself and rambled a bit about the superbowl. At this point he announced that he had several coworkers with him, two of whom looked, I kid you not, like Agents (were Agent Smith et. al. collecting social security). These guys never smiled, all night.

    McBride starts off by talking about the role of intellectual property in the digital age. He talks briefly about copyright law in the digital age, and asks about Napster, and then talks about linux being free, and seems to be suggesting that "free things on the internet require violation of copyright". He traces through the ownership of UNIX IP, and then argues that the change between 2.2 and 2.6 was largely due to corporate help.

    He also repeatedly argues that, per recent supreme court decisions, copyright exists to benefit the public by creating profit incentive. He keeps painting the IP debate as a pendulum swinging between public and private ownership, but continually stresses "Do we want a world where all IP is free?" which of course, no one is arguing for. He mentions that the GPL hasn't been tested in court (an allegation nic

  • wow! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Mr_Silver ( 213637 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @02:43PM (#8172608)
    Best line was one student who when Darl asked if he was impacted by MyDoom. A e-mail virus answered 'No, I use Linux'

    I'm not sure what I'm more impressed by - the fact that an email virus can talk, or that it's speaking at Harvard on behalf of Darl.

  • there there (Score:5, Funny)

    by neko9 ( 743554 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @02:53PM (#8172758)
    He discusses MyDoom, and also evidently someone on slashdot who posted his home address and phone number, resulting in a DDOS of his house during the superbowl

    Darl reads slashdot??!!
    and can you imagine your house in denial of service? and distributed? all rooms are denying you sevice... even toilet... oh horror :-)

  • RMS is not crazy! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @02:54PM (#8172761)

    Above all, we wanted to go and present the non-RMS, non-crazy-anti-IP side of linux.

    [..]

    We're having the law forced on us, and if we're not careful, one day we're going to wake up in a world where IP restrictions will take all the fun out of engineering.

    Maybe you should go back and listen to "crazy" RMS when he talks about these legal issues. Which he's talked about since day one. And people laughed at him.

    When the FSF insists on paperwork for all major contributions, there's a good reason. When they insist that all copyrights be centralized with the FSF, there's a good reason.

    Linus may be popular to us geeks because of his easygoing nature, but easygoing gets you eaten alive out in the real world.

  • SCO brings a "sharpshooter" to a Darlnote... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by kuwan ( 443684 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @02:56PM (#8172802) Homepage

    I got this off of the SCOX yahoo board:

    'Electronic terror' in Linux's shadow [eetimes.com]

    You'll find this about 2/3 of the way through the article:

    When SCO Group chief executive officer Darl McBride appeared at the Mandalay Bay Convention Center in Las Vegas in November to deliver a keynote speech at CD Expo, the company brought a sharpshooter along for protection.

    And they call the Linux community fanatical! :)

  • Settlement (Score:3, Funny)

    by ubeans ( 449308 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @02:57PM (#8172812) Homepage
    Can we just settle for GNU/SCO/Linux :)

  • Um, doesn't this belong... (Score:3, Funny)

    by msimm ( 580077 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @03:15PM (#8173040) Homepage
    in the games section?

  • Best Line that most people probably over looked (Score:3, Insightful)

    by SpyPlane ( 733043 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @04:03PM (#8173620)
    Above all, we wanted to go and present the non-RMS, non-crazy-anti-IP side of linux.

  • and then... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Cruciform ( 42896 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @04:33PM (#8173973) Homepage
    Best line was one student who when Darl asked if he was impacted by MyDoom.A e-mail virus answered 'No, I use Linux'."

    At this point Darl wrung his hands gleefully and said "Sic 'im boys!". Two heavyset men set upon the freeloading nerd and, after a brief struggle, relieved him of his wallet. "Anyone else use Linux?", Darl jeered, as he pocketed 2 dollars, fifty five cents, and an expired bus pass.

  • To really make the point stick... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by gosand ( 234100 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @04:39PM (#8174044)
    It sounds like the students were pretty well informed, at least more than the speakers were. I think to really drive the point home, nobody should have showed up.

    I mean, having SCO speak on how to defend intellectual property rights is like Bill Gates giving a speech on business ethics.

  • Distancing ourselves from extremists. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by borgheron ( 172546 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @04:40PM (#8174063) Homepage Journal
    All,

    It's difficult to believe that these attacks (DDoS) and threats on SCO might be from GNU/Linux users.

    Despite the timing of the attacks, all of the evidence is highly circumstantial.

    We, as a community, however, must distance ourselves from extremists or extremist activities such as this by whatever means possible.

    We cannot compromise our core values which are embodied by the work done on Open Source and Free Software, but we also cannot allow corporations to usurp our hard work.

    We must, *above all else*, allow this to play out in court as this is the *only* way to make certain something like this doesn't happen again.

    This is my message and, while I can't speak for the community, I believe these statments to be undeniable. I, personally, don't think a Linux user is behind the attacks, but if it is, then it's one person or a small group of people who are acting foolishly and should not reflect on the community as a whole.

    Thanks, GJC

  • One comment I'd like to have seen made... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by hankaholic ( 32239 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @05:20PM (#8174540)
    I really wish that when Darl stated that the GPL hadn't been tested in court, someone had pointed out that neither had SCO's assertions.

    At least one argument they're using against the GPL can be used against the claim that anyone should pay them $699 per CPU.

  • Saint Thomas Moore (Score:3, Interesting)

    by argoff ( 142580 ) on Tuesday February 03, 2004 @07:20PM (#8175630)
    Anyone renember St. Thomas, where when the king forced everyone to change to his religion, he disagreed strongly, but tried to declare that he was in full compliance of the law - because the law gave him the right to be silent.

    In a way, this is what's happening today. I am confident that the GPL here is not in violation of the law, but I am also confident that copyright monopolies do not belong in the information age and must go. And the GPL is the license most true to that spirit.

    PS: St Thomas was executed, inspite of his attempt to stay within the law by being silent. There's a lesson to be learned from this.

  • I was one of the law students in attendance... (Score:3, Informative)

    by kmcrober ( 194430 ) on Wednesday February 04, 2004 @12:59AM (#8177635)
    I tried submitting the notice and the address for the live webcast a few days in advance, but it got rejected by the editors. Better late than never, I guess. You can watch the speech at the Journal of Law and Technology's archive [harvard.edu].

    JOLT's presentation of the event was very odd. They made a few comments at the start that made it sound like they were only grudgingly admitting non-Harvard Law students, which is a shame, because the MIT people really came to play. Their questions were good, and the kept it all professional and on-message. (JOLT does and always has, as far as I know, made their events open off-campus; the editor's comments just made it sound like he wasn't all that happy to have a room packed with non-HLS kids.)

    Darl was also impressive, to be honest. He was more than a little bit evasive in his answers, but he was very good about going back to the MIT students for questions, even though there were some obviously more sympathetic law students with their hands up. He also stayed around for a bit after the presentation to talk to a small knot of students, presumably including the author of the linked piece.

    While he didn't convince me that SCO has a case, he did a fairly good job of convincing me that he *believes* they have a case, and that it's not a scam. He did, after the speech in the small discussion, address the "pump and dump" allegations; he denies selling any significant stock, and claimed any internal sell-offs have been minor and insignificant. I was just on the periphery of that conversation though, so take my report with a grain of salt.

    A couple of people have commented on McBride's bodyguard. He did, in fact, have a bodyguard there; I was told it was because he's received death threats. The other guy (the one who actually looks like a bodyguard) was a Harvard police officer; university policy forbids guest speakers from bringing bodyguards on campus without a peace officer in attendance, apparently.

Slashdot Top Deals

Solutions are obvious if one only has the optical power to observe them over the horizon. -- K.A. Arsdall

Close