SCO Says They'll Sue A Linux User Tomorrow 606
Xenographic writes "InfoWorld is reporting that SCO intends to sue a Linux using company. Ordinarily, this would not be newsworthy, as they have not followed through on past threats. However, this time, they have given themselves a concrete deadline--tomorrow. While they claim that it will be one of the "top 1,000" companies, they apparently have yet to decide which company to actually sue. Perhaps they need more practice playing darts?" Reader Fished links to CNET's coverage.
What would John Kerry say? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:What would John Kerry say? (Score:5, Funny)
Me thinks they're probably having trouble with their random number generator in Unixware. Why doesn't someone drop Darl [mailto] a line and suggest he try Linux. While you're at it maybe you could suggest that they sue Canopy Group [canopy.com]. You could mention that they're the parent company that owns Caldera and that they're currently anticipating a $5 billion dollar influx from IBM. Since Darl is obviously looking for a big fish maybe he'll try this one.
Suing oneself (Score:5, Interesting)
Suing a group that stands to gain by losing the lawsuit would be a shrewd move. It would give SCO greater ability to set the stage for a setting a precedent favorable to SCO.
However, the shrewdest move would be to sue a company holding the "information wants to be free" line religiously. It is often easy to win the court's favor when your opponent is holding an absurd ideal with religiour fervor. The worst thing would be to sue a well respected company with shrewd leadership, as they are likely to punch real legitimate holes in the SCO case.
Re:Suing oneself (Score:5, Interesting)
If you are right then the concept of justice no longer exists in this country. If courts decide a case on what somebody believes or their religion then we are all fucked.
OTOH even if you are wrong just the fact you hold that belief is a harsh indictment of the courts.
Re:Suing oneself (Score:5, Informative)
If a company gets sued they will hire lawyers. If they want to prevail they will hire lawyers with experience in the particular area of law.
A fortune 1000 company would certainly hire a competent law firm to defend it.
BTW it would be lawyers who present arguments not the company itself.
Re:Suing oneself (Score:5, Interesting)
What I find interesting is that they are (apparently) planning to sue one of their own customers! How stupid would anyone have to be to sign a contract with them?
http://news.com.com/2100-1016_3-5167829.html?tag=s t_lh [com.com]
The first target will be a company that has a Unix license from SCO already, giving SCO some contractual leverage in the case. McBride said. In addition, the suit will involve copyright infringement claims.
Re:Suing oneself (Score:4, Insightful)
Something that disturbs me, and I don't see it mentioned here, is that SCO has not proven their case in court. Don't they have to prove their claims before they can sue anybody?
What would Howard Dean say? (Score:4, Funny)
Bets anyone? (Score:5, Funny)
Thoughts anyone?
Re:Bets anyone? (Score:4, Funny)
by Ben Hutchings (4651) on Tue Mar 02, '04 07:15 AM (#8439394)
How do you have a 4 digit /. ID and not recognize a quote from Office Space [imdb.com]?
I'll tell you what he would say... (Score:5, Funny)
Interviewer begins to droop.
<monotone>...and of course, President Bush has not shown the, uhhhhhhhhh, leadership that we expect from a Commander-In-Chief on this issue...</monotone>
Interviewer nods off.
<monotone>...and, uhhhhhhhh, obviously, SCO has not shown that they have a case and I think they're clearly wrong... </monotone>
Audience nods off.
<monotone>...but SCO has clearly shown the leadership to...</monotone>
Both audience and interviewer have dangerously weak heartbeats.
<monotone>...my record is clear in that I believe in the SCO case and, uhhhhhhh...</monotone>
Most members of the audience are clinically dead. The interviewer is sprawled on the floor.
<monotone>...those who would question my patriotism by implying that my position has changed on this matter...</monotone>
Temperature reaches absolute zero as all atomic motion stops.
<monotone>...which is, uhhhhhhh, why I think I will be your next President. My Vietnam war heroism makes it clear that, uhhhhhh...</monotone>
Brilliant (Score:5, Insightful)
Where people more interested in the tone of voice than the ideas.
Where people more interested in hair styles than Social Security.
Where people who would rather feel as if they were just consuming another product they may judge by the pretty packaging and ad campaign.
What you should be asking yourself is... (Score:5, Funny)
What would Brian Boitano do
If he was here right now?
He'd make a plan, and he'd follow through,
That's what Brian Boitano'd do!
When Brian Boitano came
and knocked at SCO's door
he kicked Darl's stupid ass
and with it he wiped the floor.
Hi de lo de hi de lay!
Brian Boitano's here!
So round up all your lasses,
And tell them to have no fear!
Google (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Google (Score:5, Interesting)
Besides, if Google did get sued, it wouldn't harm them that much, because of the IPO that they are releasing soon (hopefully).
*Looks at Anti-SCO shirt* Sure, I may be a flamebait, but I think it's for a good cause. I'm fed up with all of this SCO nonsense, and I'm pretty sure the open-source/Linux world is also. I just want to see what SCO can really pull off... no more of this standing-in-the-corner-pointing-fingers stuff. Bring it on SCO.
Re:Google (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Google (Score:5, Insightful)
Really? You don't think so? Why was it that Google delayed that IPO again? Something about bad timing wasn't it?
Tomorrow, when SCO sues Google, I'm going to link back to this post*. How much longer can they keep this up? The whole story is starting to fall apart so why not have one last huge grandstand move and sue Google. Even your GrandMa has heard of Google, and what's that? MSNBC says some company is sueing them? Noone will ignore the press release, air will be gasped, monocles will pop out of eyes and ladies will swoon. But SCO stock will rise, and rich people will get richer and Darl will have to think of another more astonishing way to get peoples attention or we'll start to ignore him like we should. And SCO still won't have actually done anything.
*And of course, if they don't, I'm going to ignore it and hope no one notices
Re:Google (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Google (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Google (Score:5, Funny)
Its Irving Tonks, a 16 year old high school student in North Dakota. He downloaded Linux off the net and he is currently using it to write code for a class project in perl on a PentiumPro machine his Dad gave him from work.
Things could be grim in the Tonks household - after Dad lost his job and mum died of cancer they have been living off Gran's social security. It is not clear that they can afford the billion dollars SCO is claiming in damages.
Re:Google (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Google (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Google (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Google (Score:5, Funny)
What, did you do your calculation on a Unixware box, or what?
A little confusing... (Score:4, Interesting)
The SCO Group on Tuesday will launch its first lawsuit against a Linux user for alleged violations of SCO's intellectual property, SCO Chief Executive Officer Darl McBride said Monday.
and continues a little later:
After consulting with its law firm, Boies, Schiller and Flexner, SCO has narrowed down its list of possible targets to a "handful" of the world's 1,000 largest corporations, McBride said. "We're going to file it tomorrow. It's sort of come down to a couple of complaints we have prepared," he said.
So when they sue an "end user", is it going to be an Executive in a Fortune 1000 company? Or an employee? I assumed "end user" meant your average Joe. They're just asking for trouble (as the article points out) if they sue someone in a Fortune 1000 company.
Re:A little confusing... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:A little confusing... (Score:5, Insightful)
>Since when has anything SCO said made sense?
hey, it's a valid question! the concept of end user isn't objective, it depends on who you are:
of course if you just piss away your valuable dev time posting on slashdot, the end user is whoever has mod points...
Re:A little confusing... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:A little confusing... (Score:5, Insightful)
Really, the old on-line adage "don't feed the trolls" seems somehow appropriate.
Re:A little confusing... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:A little confusing... (Score:5, Funny)
They are suing IBM! The company they are already in a lawsuit with!
Re:A little confusing... (Score:5, Insightful)
And the corporation's lawyers will respond, "Sorry, we bought our Linux from (insert distributor here). You have take your claim to them, and you will receive any compensation you might be due directly from them for selling SCO IP without a valid license. Piss off."
KFG
Re:A little confusing... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:My biggest fear.. (Score:5, Funny)
Where are they going to find impartial jurors?
*Everyone* with enough technical background to fully understand the issue ...
... would of course be immediately disqualified from the jury.
Re:A little confusing... (Score:5, Informative)
The deference argument might not work because of privity. In their mystery world, SCO has a relationship with the particular fortune 500 company, because it is violating SCO's copyright. SCO does not necessarily have a relationship with the distributor. SCO has a right to sue them, too, but Linux distributors are not deep pockets or headline grabbers. A property holder, and similarly in the case of constructive property like copyright, can claim any infringement against any violator, in intent or negligence.
This permits people who copy movies to be as liable as people who possess bootlegs. It is the use (or presumed use) which is violated, and that use often flows from presence. In other words, SCO will say "look, that Acme Co. is violating our property rights by benefitting from their use of Linux." It is possible that it's more likely that you can distribute Linux than you can actually use it, but both are copyright infringements in the absence of permission (as explicitly set out in the GNU GPL), and the "use" of Linux is possibly an ancillary claim of "unjust enrichment" to the user in addition to restitution.
A half-ass analogy would be a movie theatre that rents a DVD at blockbuster and puts it through a projector to make money off of it in public sales, directly contrary to the copyright stipulations on the movie that prohibit redistribution, sale, or profit without prior written authorization. The copyright holder/MPAA isn't going to go after Blockbuster, who legally (or illegally if it's bootlegged) distributed the copyright material, but rather the theatre which also violated the rights. The theatre has (a) potentially deeper pockets, (b) directly, and intentionally or negligently infringed the rights of the property holder, and (c) no means of indemnification through the distributor. The corollary is that there is no onus upon the distributor to validate a use of the purchaser.
In other words, if the use of Linux is part of the claim, not just possession, the Fortune 500 company has no indemnification through the distributor. Unless there was an explicit indemnification clause in the distributor's license (GPL? BSD? etc.) or contract, it is unlikely, or I'd go so far as to say impossible, to pass the buck to them.
The Fortune 500 company is almost certain to be a valid target of SCO's claim. Mind you, being a valid target does not validate the claim itself!
Re:A little confusing... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:A little confusing... (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, the better response would be "Your honour, the actual ownership of the IP in question has not been resolved yet, therefore we believe that this suit is premature, and ask for it to be held in abeyance until such time as SCO actually proves it owns what it is suing us for."
Kierthos
Re:A little confusing... (Score:5, Interesting)
I didn't see anywhere where they said it involved SCO IP in Linux. Just a Linux user misusing SCO IP. Might be a minor distinction. Might not.
Re:A little confusing... (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't know if you can really get much worse than IBM. IBM's been around the block, they've been the bad dog, have more US patents than most nations have in their patent registry, and probably have more elite, fire-breathing IP layers than SCO has employees.
And SCO is suing for three billion.
Of course, more straw on the camel's back won't do them any good, but I fail to see how they could have picked a harder target than what they already have.
Cheers
Re:A little confusing... (Score:5, Informative)
> And SCO is suing for three billion.
$5 billion [com.com]
Re:A little confusing... (Score:5, Funny)
choose me! choose me! (Score:5, Funny)
This is so exciting! I wonder if Dick Clark will come to my house to tell me if I win!
Who ever does win this honor will be lavished with attention, job offers, pro bono lawyers and scads of cash from the counter suit.
Where do I sign up?
--
Mike
Re:A little confusing... (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, good call SCO (Score:5, Insightful)
Personally, I woulda sued... Well... Me.
Re:Oh, good call SCO (Score:5, Insightful)
That, or... (Score:5, Insightful)
The idea is, they can't possibly win, but they can attract lots and lots of attention to themselves because they can drag out the trial ad infinitum. By suing someone really big who people expect would have a strong case instead of someone small, people will apply the false analogy that SCO has a strong case and can win lots of cash.
I've heard many older folks repeatedly say that "trading music is okay now", because they've conflated the idea that Kazaa sued the RIAA with the idea that there happen to be legal places to buy music online. SCO is hoping that they can scum up the same type of conflation: "SCO is suing IBM for using that bad, bad linux thing (the one we saw on those IBM commercials), and Microsoft says Linux is bad..., and we use Windows at home... and..."
Re:Oh, good call SCO (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, it would have made more sense to sue someone like you if SCO was actually trying to win the lawsuit. However, you can't trick investors into thinking that you can extract $3 billion from "Skyshadow," but it is at least theoretically possible to extract $3 billion from IBM. With a little help from Microsoft and Sun (to add a bit of legitimacy to the claims), SCO had all the tools it needed to extract millions of dollars from the stock market.
The trick, of course, is to promise investors the moon to drive up the stock price, and then use the high stock price to either cash out or to purchase (at inflated prices) other companies that SCO backers have an interest in (like Vultus).
The reason that SCO is going to sue someone tomorrow is that on the 3rd they are supposed to post their quarterly earnings. My guess is that the financial reports are going to be very very bad and the new law suit is designed to draw attention away from the bottom line.
Re:Conspiricy theory again! (Score:5, Insightful)
Competecy? Are you kidding? This is stock scam, it's been going on for a year, and still going very strong. The market cap has been pumped from under $20 to over $150 million in a year. And scox was never worth even $20 million. This scam is way beyond competent.
Ever hear of the Mormon Mafia?
Office Pool.... (Score:5, Funny)
Either that or RedHat.
Re:Office Pool.... (Score:4, Insightful)
That's it. (Score:5, Funny)
Aaaaaah, fuck it, who am I kidding.
It's like shoveling jelly beans into your mouth at the candy store - sure, it rots your teeth out and you end up with diabetes, but it tastes so damned good you can't help yourself.
this is all really out of hand... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yup, (Score:3, Interesting)
Oh! Oh! I know who it will be ... (Score:5, Funny)
Nevermind, thats a lawsuit they might actually win. Given their current record of idiocy and bad public relations, my guess is that it will be the the Pope [netcraft.com]
Re:Oh! Oh! I know who it will be ... (Score:5, Interesting)
Oh boy, this is bad... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Oh boy, this is bad... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Oh boy, this is bad... (Score:5, Funny)
Perhaps (Score:5, Interesting)
...this is why Google delayed it's IPO?
DISCLAIMER: Complete and total speculation.
Re:Perhaps (Score:5, Informative)
Off by two months (Score:5, Funny)
This is March, not April. Please refrain from wasting all of our good material until that time.
Thank you,
-Slashdot
You've got to ask yourself a question (Score:5, Funny)
Re:You've got to ask yourself a question (Score:5, Funny)
SCO will sue EV1! (Score:5, Insightful)
As other have pointed out, EV1 can't comply with SCO's linux license and still get Redhat patches, so there is actually a case that SCO can win against them now.
How about... (Score:5, Insightful)
And we all know how assiduously ... (Score:3, Insightful)
I'll just be holding my breath over there, in the corner.
earnings announcement (Score:5, Interesting)
undisclosed amounts (Score:5, Funny)
Re:undisclosed amounts (Score:5, Funny)
$00006.99
Could be a long-term contract (Score:5, Insightful)
EV1 might have agreed to pay SCO $1/year for the next million years, for all we know.
Big surprise (Score:5, Insightful)
OK now let me make sure I have all of this straight. Wednesday is the day the SCO quarterly non-earnings report will be released, which most likely won't be good news. So, on Tuesday, the day before the report is released, SCO makes a stock, I mean lawsuit announcement. Do I detect a pattern here?
Re:Big surprise (Score:5, Informative)
Yeah, they did the same thing the last quarter also. That's when they sent the threat letters. Just a stunt to draw attention away from scox gushing red ink.
And it works, it works like a charm.
Walmart (Score:5, Interesting)
That's my best guess.
If it happens.
Hasn't yet.
Re:Walmart (Score:5, Interesting)
Maybe: Walmart is somewhat vulnerable, having been recently accused by the US DoJ of knowingly hiring illegal aliens. Also, they've taken a lot of heat in the press lately, due to the public perception that they're responsible for displacing local businesses (mom 'n' pop stores, the mainstays of "Main Street, USA"). Witness their recent ad campaign, an attempt to soften their image.
Maybe not: Walmart is huge. Mother huge. Makes IBM look like a candy store. 1.3 million employees huge. Consider that the US workforce is 139 million: this means that nearly 1 out of 100 working people in this country work for Walmart.
Also, getting money out of Wally World is like squeezing blood from a rock. I know this from experience; a relative of mine is one of their software vendors. Walmart doesn't pay until the invoice is marked "FINAL NOTICE - WE MEAN IT THIS TIME - YOU PAY NOW OR DIE!!!" in 72 point blood red type.
Sam Walton might be dead and buried, but his management style lives on at Wally World. Before he died, he was the richest man in the US (before Bill Gates, basically the Windows 1.0 era), but he drove an old pickup truck. To say he was stingy would be the ultimate understatement.
So, in the spirit of that parsimonious old fuck, I think Walmart would rather spend $10 million fighing SCO than settle for $1 million, just out of principle, since it would be a sign of weakness to settle out of court. And just for spite, they'd insist that all of their suppliers maintain a SCO-free shop or lose their shelf-space. It would be like Rome and Carthage all over again, with SCO razed and salted, their employees sold into slavery.
k.
Open source needs to find a hungry DA (Score:5, Interesting)
By suing a Linux end users, SCO is in effect trying to use courts to extort money. The definition of extort is "to obtain from a person by force, intimidation, or undue or illegal power". I cannot see the difference between SCO's actions, press releases and the running a criminal enterprise.
If they (SCO) truly wished to protect their IP, they would proceed with their case and quit stalling. The Linux community would respond, in defference to and in respect to an IP rights. I think that is the crux of SCO's problem, Linux would respond by respectfully removing any proven IP content. If they can extort money from people instead of actually proving their case, then the profit margin goes up. So what if extortion is illegal.
AngryPeoplePeopleRule [angrypeoplerule.com]
How the lawsuit is going to go in court ... (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.fsf.org/licenses/gpl.html [fsf.org]
The SCO Group has failed to put forward ANY substantial legal theory why the SCO Group should not be obligated to abide by the terms of the GPL.
http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/sco/sco-without-fear
The SCO Group obligations under the GPL has been reiterated and reinforced in the legal positions of IBM, Redhat and Novell in their respective cases against the SCO Group.
It is a criminal offense to claim, with fraudulent intent, that you have a copyright if you do not. The SCO Group does *NOT* hold the copyrights to the UNIX source code. Novell has *NOT* transfered the title for the works that the SCO Group fraudulently filed for copyright in 2003. The SCO Group do not have the right to sue anybody for violation of copyright works without the assent of the title holder.
The SCO Group claims the right to sue for work in standard UNIX and POSIX interfaces that AT&T and Novell granted full rights to use royalty free in perpetuity for the ISO, ANSI and FIPS federal standards.
The SCO Group's contract claims against IBM and others based upon the AT&T license in respect to rights of so called derivative works is in direct contradiction to evidence presented to the SCO Group by Novell.
The SCO Group though the press and SEC filings, has bolstered the share price of the SCO Group based upon demonstrably false claims to the contrary of above points 1,2 and 3. The SCO Group CEOs and legal agents were notified by Novell and IBM *before* making these false claims and presenting them as fact. The actions of the SCO Group must be in violation of several SEC regulations.
So how is the lawsuit going to go if it gets to court?
Eben Moglen's Harvard Speech
http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/p.cgi/speakers.html [harvard.edu]
The Transcript
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=200402260 03735733 [groklaw.net]
me me me me me.... (Score:5, Funny)
Weird. (Score:5, Funny)
Seven Figure Bullshit (Score:5, Insightful)
This has to be bullshit. There's no way that EV1 is going to pay 7 figures for a license from these pricks. They operate on a razor thin margin at $99 bucks per month per server. This is a bargin basement hosting facility. I call bullshit on this this statement. The price was probably:
$1,000,000 - License Fee
- $999,900 - Early Bird license discount.
___________
I want to see the additional 7 figures in the quarterly report. 7 figures my ass.
Re:Seven Figure Bullshit (Score:4, Funny)
Could be true (Score:4, Interesting)
Maestro, please... (Score:5, Funny)
They'll sue a user
Tomorrow
Bet your parity digit
That tomorrow
One'll be found!
SCO will find
Tomorrow
Someone running Linux
On their desktop
And they'll frown!
They've been stuck in a daze
Malaise
'Bout OpenSource
Now they'll file their briefs
Cry "Thiefs!'
'Til Hoarse.....
Oh!
The suit will be filed
Tomorrow
Darl will have his kilo of geek
Come tomorrow
So he'll say......
Tomorrow! Tomorrow!
He'll sue them Tomorrow!
It's always
A day
A way!
Screw whichever company they are going to sue... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Screw whichever company they are going to sue.. (Score:4, Funny)
SCO: Please Sue Me! (Score:5, Funny)
Come on. I dare you.
I double dare you!
You pussies.
They have two options. (Score:5, Insightful)
a) Going to pass this by, probably with a lot of angry geeks and scared company CEOs. Watch as their target "bought a license at the last minute" and they don't even disclose who it is.
b) Sue someone, get laughed out of court while trying to hold it as long as they can, and die anyway. Stealing people's money in the process for their license fees. Hopefully, the SEC will get off their ass and stop them.
You're safe tomorrow unless... (Score:5, Informative)
"The first target will be a company that has a Unix license from SCO already, giving SCO some contractual leverage in the case. McBride said. In addition, the suit will involve copyright infringement claims."
Darl continuies to make it obvious that the worse possible decision a company can make is do business with him.
Rackspace? (Score:5, Interesting)
SCO HAS to sue someone else. (Score:5, Insightful)
http://financyahoo.e.com/q?s=SCOX
SCO is not a software company. It's a publicly traded lawsuit. They've delayed and delayed and delayed too long with IBM and the truth is getting out. If they don't start another lawsuit their entire business model is threatened.
Re:SCO HAS to sue someone else. (Score:5, Interesting)
SCO vs. RedHat [yahoo.com]
SCO vs. IBM [yahoo.com]
Notice a trend?
AWESOME! 1 in 280,000,000 chance of AWESOMENESS! (Score:5, Funny)
That means... drum-roll please... we have a chance (1/280,000,000) it's the same plump 12 year old chick who got busted by the RIAA!
Imagine seeing her next superbowl? "Hi, I'm totally fucked over and never touching a computer again. Choose Franklin Covey(R), the best choice in paper organizers."
Isn't this illegal even with a disclaimer (Score:5, Insightful)
"McBride said the arrangement with EV1Servers.net is perpetual and that SCO doesn't offer companies their money back if courts later find SCO's claims baseless. It will bring in revenue that will be material to SCO's financial results, he added."
The Choice is Obvious (Score:5, Funny)
Slashdot poll (Score:5, Funny)
Which Linux user is SCO going to sue next?
Google
Yahoo
WalMart
EV1Servers.net
Microsoft (oh the irony)
State of California
U.S. Government
A 12 yr old girl
Cowboyneal
Zehn kleine UNIX Zeilen (Score:5, Funny)
Zehn kleine UNIX Zeilen
Reicht man ein zur Klage.
Die eine die auf griechisch war,
War leider viel zu vage.
Neun kleine UNIX Zeilen
Sollten es begrunden.
Die eine war trotz groBter Muh'
In LINUX nicht zu finden.
Acht kleine UNIX Zeilen
Dienten zum Beweise.
Die eine war aus BSD,
Pech fur Anwalt Heise.
Sieben kleine UNIX Zeilen,
Kamen vor Gericht.
Die eine war 'ne Fehlernummer,
Die taugte dazu nicht.
Sechs kleine UNIX Zeilen,
Sollten es belegen.
Doch eine kam zur GPL
Durch SCO Kollegen.
Funf kleine UNIX Zeilen
Waren noch dabei.
Die eine kam von einem Band
Mit Aufschrift System Drei.
Vier kleine UNIX Zeilen,
Doch eine, sonderbar,
Gehorte nicht zum dem Programm,
Sie war ein Kommentar.
Drei Kleine UNIX Zeilen,
Waren das Problem.
Eine war zwar System Five,
Doch kam von IBM.
Zwei kleine UNIX Zeilen,
Waren noch geblieben.
Die eine war schon reichlich alt
Und kam von System Sieben.
Eine kleine UNIX Zeile
Wurde angefuhrt.
Die hatte Linus Torvalds selbst
Am Anfang programmiert.
Ohne eine UNIX Zeile
Kann SCO nichts machen.
Doch eines muss man zugestehn:
Wir hatten was zu lachen.
Schlussbemerkung:
Hier zeigt sehr schon ein Kinderlied,
Warum McBride die Wahrheit mied.
stolen from Heise forum [heise.de]
(now some foo to exploit the lameness filter - damn you slashcode!) # Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. # Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. # Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. # Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. # Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page)Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 14.1).
Google or a firewall manufacturer (Score:5, Interesting)
Why ?
Microsoft has made big noises lately about moving into the search engine space, and also made noises about an impending firewall product.
SCO, taking orders from above, will target the competion in these areas, hoping to tie them up in court for ages, so that Microsoft can enter these markets with reduced competition.
You dont even need a tinfoil hat to see that one coming.
They'll follow through on this threat (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:OSDN (Score:5, Funny)
If that happens, you can be sure CmdrTaco will post it here on Slashdot for all of us to read and comment on.
And then again on Thursday.
And once more next month.
</ObDupejoke>
Re:What the hell do they think they're doing? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:No evidence until IBM case is settled (Score:5, Insightful)
The Novell case is much more interesting here as it deals with wether SCO really have any copyrights to Linux.