Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux helpSpecial Offers
Feature
SCO dumps Linux development, threatens Linux users
By on
May 15, 2003 (8:00:00 AM)
Share
Print
Comments
- by Lee Schlesinger -
The SCO Group is getting out of the Linux business and into the legal arena. That's the message the company is sending to customers with a letter this week. It said it is suspending its "Linux-related activities" while aggressively protecting its intellectual property rights in Unix. At the same time, SCO is implying it could sue anyone who uses Linux, saying "legal liability that may arise from the Linux development process may also rest with the end user."
The SCO Group is getting out of the Linux business and into the legal arena. That's the message the company is sending to customers with a letter this week. It said it is suspending its "Linux-related activities" while aggressively protecting its intellectual property rights in Unix. At the same time, SCO is implying it could sue anyone who uses Linux, saying "legal liability that may arise from the Linux development process may also rest with the end user."
How wrong-headed can one company's management be?
Two months ago SCO filed suit against IBM, charging the computing giant with "misusing and misappropriating SCO's proprietary software; inducing, encouraging, and enabling others to misuse and misappropriate SCO's proprietary software; and incorporating (and inducing, encouraging, and enabling others to incorporate) SCO's proprietary software into open source software offerings."
It's true that Unix owns the rights to Unix System V. Caldera, SCO's prior incarnation, acquired them from Novell in 1995, two years after that company had purchased them from AT&T, where Unix originated in the 1960s. And it's true that a company has to enforce those rights if it hopes to maintain a business advantage from them.
It's not clear, however, that IBM has done anything SCO accuses it of. Linux is a clone of Unix. That doesn't mean it uses the same source code. There's a long, clear history in business of companies reverse-engineering successful products. In this case, IBM is using the work of thousands of open source programmers -- all of whom are too numerous, and too poor, for SCO to hit with a billion-dollar lawsuit.
A judge will have to examine source code and listen to arguments about what constitutes misappropriation. If the court decides SCO is in the right, determining an appropriate penalty could take years. (Can you say "Microsoft antitrust"?)
In addition to its legal implications, the latest statement is a stinging attack on open source development itself. Consider:
Commercial software is built by carefully selected and screened teams of programmers working to build proprietary, secure software. This process is designed to monitor the security and ownership of intellectual property rights associated with the code.
By contrast, much of Linux has been built from contributions by numerous unrelated and unknown software developers, each contributing a small section of code. There is no mechanism inherent in the Linux development process to assure that intellectual property rights, confidentiality or security are protected. The Linux process does not prevent inclusion of code that has been stolen outright, or developed by improper use of proprietary methods and concepts.
SCO is correct that open source developers follow no corporate process designed to prevent theft of intellectual property. Instead, there's a stronger force at work -- pride. Open source developers have only their reputations on the line -- not their income, not their jobs. Pride in doing a job well, pride in not stealing work that rightfully belongs to others, does more to keep open source developers honest than any corporate policy ever could.
It's hard to identify what SCO ultimately hopes to accomplish. Many companies turn to lawsuits as a last-ditch attempt to find revenue after they realize they don't have any hope of maintaining their existence any other way. That may be the game SCO is playing. The company is increasingly unprofitable, though it is expected to announce a profitable quarter at the end of this month.
A Gartner analyst posits that the IBM lawsuit is a way to make SCO more tempting as a takeover candidate. That's unlikely though -- everyone in the open source community, which is far larger than the SCO customer base, now views anything associated with SCO with scorn. As for the likelihood of IBM buying the company to dispense with an annoyance -- fat chance.
SCO's annual shareholder meeting is Friday at the company's headquarters in Utah. It should be interesting to hear how the company handles questions about these moves it will surely get from press and customers alike.
SCO has little reason not to put its Linux business on hold. I suspect it has had a hard time selling any copies since it announced the IBM lawsuit. Current OpenServer and UnixWare customers should view this move as a wakeup call. As SCO Linux goes today, so will the other operating systems go tomorrow if long legal battle drains the company's coffers while customers stay away in disgust. Customers should investigate other options for server platforms now to be prepared for a possible transition later.
Comments
on SCO dumps Linux development, threatens Linux usersNote: Comments are owned by the poster. We are not responsible for their content.
Yah right, hey SCO, see what I did, I removed your software, it's gone, kaput, ditto, vwalla, nadda.
I don't use you no more. Take that you evil, Bill Gates counterpart............
I have the last laugh now.
I hate it when some moron, not George W, takes away my happiness to better theirs. We sould send SCO to Iraq. I'll be damned if I go over to M$ and use that crappy, overbloated, privacy stripper of a proggie.
Microsoft and SCO are obviously related. Boycott
I don't use you no more. Take that you evil, Bill Gates counterpart............
I have the last laugh now.
I hate it when some moron, not George W, takes away my happiness to better theirs. We sould send SCO to Iraq. I'll be damned if I go over to M$ and use that crappy, overbloated, privacy stripper of a proggie.
Microsoft and SCO are obviously related. Boycott
Heck yeah.
I would be *almost* willing to wager that M$ will probably end up owning the rights to UNIX - as a strategy to try to stop Linux.... And I think that this is the reason SCO is busy stirring up the pot - to get Billy and that "Bald Used Car Salesman" sidekick of his to come up with the "brilliant innovation" of buying SCO..... Gates and whats-his-name, being the rocket scientists they are, will any day now "discover" this innovation - just like the internet and all the other marvels that they have "created" for the modern world.
SCO is not that manipulative. they can't possibly be planning something so stupid. They are stupid but not that stupid.
SCO's logic and use of GNU does not jive. Their arguments are tantamount to a babbling idiot. Any judge will laugh his ass off reading through this BS.
I just don't understand why they want to die this way? Anyone want to clue me in? SCO? You fags? Listening? Enterprises don't use SCO anymore. You are done. Adapt or Die.
Man, I hope Sun doesn't go down like this. How embarrassing...
I just don't understand why they want to die this way? Anyone want to clue me in? SCO? You fags? Listening? Enterprises don't use SCO anymore. You are done. Adapt or Die.
Man, I hope Sun doesn't go down like this. How embarrassing...
>> I just don't understand why they want to die this way? Anyone want to clue me in?
Well, my guess is good as anyone's, but still...
what do you do when you conclude that other companies (Red Hat) are successful while yours suck? You plan an "harvesting" strategy.
Your product (and company) is gonna sink so you tell everyone: "Let's save ourselves, 'cause this beauty ain't gonna make it."
So I think they set themselves towards getting a MS-job.
If this is the case, after their company unavoidably dies, I may even wish they get such position.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)
Well, my guess is good as anyone's, but still...
what do you do when you conclude that other companies (Red Hat) are successful while yours suck? You plan an "harvesting" strategy.
Your product (and company) is gonna sink so you tell everyone: "Let's save ourselves, 'cause this beauty ain't gonna make it."
So I think they set themselves towards getting a MS-job.
If this is the case, after their company unavoidably dies, I may even wish they get such position.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)
Read the complaint...it's well thought out and well executed. IBM isn't countering and is instead trying to settle because this lawsuit has merit and is extremely well executed. This is step 2 of a well thought out plan.
Where did you read that IBM was trying to settle?
I don't think IBM is trying to settel. IBM is playing the age old succesful Napoleon game.
"Never interrupt your enemy while he is making a mistake."
SCO accuses, IBM remains silent.
SCO yells , IBM remains silent.
SCO throws a temper tantrum, IBM remains silent.
SCO throws a cog wheel and falls dead, IBM says "what was that?"
"Never interrupt your enemy while he is making a mistake."
SCO accuses, IBM remains silent.
SCO yells , IBM remains silent.
SCO throws a temper tantrum, IBM remains silent.
SCO throws a cog wheel and falls dead, IBM says "what was that?"
I have read the complaint. It is devoid of anything but hand waving. Possibly, you should do a little research on UNIX history. SCO has blatant falsehoods in it's complaint.
Notice the careful use of UNIX, but not SCO UNIX for most of the enterprise features discussed. This is because SCO's UNIXes UnixWare and OpenServer are not enterprise ready. Linux is much more capable.
It is nothing but gasps before they die.
Notice the careful use of UNIX, but not SCO UNIX for most of the enterprise features discussed. This is because SCO's UNIXes UnixWare and OpenServer are not enterprise ready. Linux is much more capable.
It is nothing but gasps before they die.
I can't believe that you are at all serious. As a programmer with reasonably good writing schools, I thought the complaint was atrocious. It was so poorly researched and written that I would have been embarrassed to have been associated with it in any way.
The complaint was so full of lies and misinformation that nobody familiar with the history of Unix and Linux could possibly take it seriously. I just hope the judge and/or jury members that end up deciding the case are intelligent enough to understand the truth when IBM presents it.
The complaint was so full of lies and misinformation that nobody familiar with the history of Unix and Linux could possibly take it seriously. I just hope the judge and/or jury members that end up deciding the case are intelligent enough to understand the truth when IBM presents it.
April fools was a month and a half ago SCO!
LinuxOpers!!! LinuxOpers!!! LinuxOpers!!! LinuxOpers!!! LinuxOpers!!!
Yeh, and CinSCO de Mayo has passed as well. I ASKED IBM to pull the plug on SCO, make SCO abSCOnd, but I guess the above commentator was correct: IBM is practicing the Age-old Napoleon: Never interrupt your enemy while he's making a mistake.
Some dipshit on the SCO board gasped or belched while saying, "We've got to find a way to BOMB I", (heech, heech...) "B.M."
Heads perked up, 'BONG"?. Some of SF's Intercostal Bowel Movemements must have hit the shores of S.C and leeched/sneaked specifically into SCO's water supply. So, tripmining and "bombing" IBM became, "BONG IBM",
Maybe the windows need to be opened there, or the fans turned on...?
Yeh, and CinSCO de Mayo has passed as well. I ASKED IBM to pull the plug on SCO, make SCO abSCOnd, but I guess the above commentator was correct: IBM is practicing the Age-old Napoleon: Never interrupt your enemy while he's making a mistake.
Some dipshit on the SCO board gasped or belched while saying, "We've got to find a way to BOMB I", (heech, heech...) "B.M."
Heads perked up, 'BONG"?. Some of SF's Intercostal Bowel Movemements must have hit the shores of S.C and leeched/sneaked specifically into SCO's water supply. So, tripmining and "bombing" IBM became, "BONG IBM",
Maybe the windows need to be opened there, or the fans turned on...?
"SCO" used to be "Santa Cruz Operation" (or something like that.
Now "SCO" is "Sue Caldera's Opposition" perhaps?
Now "SCO" is "Sue Caldera's Opposition" perhaps?
Next time (in the near future) you are handing out money to a pan handler on the street it could be (and I hope it is) a SCO executive.
Besides: "LinuxOpers!!! LinuxOpers!!! LinuxOpers!!! LinuxOpers!!! LinuxOpers!!! LinuxOpers!!!"?
SCOrned,
SCOurge, abSCOnder???
Singularly, Compoundingly Offensive???
Shitty Code Orchestra??
Subversive, Cunning Overtures???
Smelly CrapOut???
=====
(Possibly SCO around 2002-12-24) "SCO SCO SCO, gotta blow, gotta blow. Gotta deliver those mines you know.." "PLeeeez Santa, don't leave me alone tonight, I missssssed yooooo!" SCO SCO SCO, gotta go gotta go, gotta trip these mines you know..." "Please, SANTA..." (splaying, laying, pining, whining...) "Splay? Splay? Splay? Gotta stay gotta stay, can't go up the chimny with my (Blank) this way..."
hehehh
I tell you WHAT, if ms is behind this, then any next attac we suffer should be the removal of that company so that the rest of the world has a chance to play ball in the computer arena. World domination by ms, regardless of ms' nation of origin, IS UNACCEPTABLE. THIS planet belongs to some 6 BILLION people, not some rich, incorrigle, sphincter-cored fatcats who could give a shit about the dupes buying their products, services, or stocks or shares.
Play fair or to away! And DON'T come back another day!
What part of Gnu does Sco not understand?
Obviously the part of it not being unix.
Recursive acronyms are cool but some folks
have trouble with them, I guess
Obviously the part of it not being unix.
Recursive acronyms are cool but some folks
have trouble with them, I guess
I think it was originally "GnuSnotUnix", I can see where use of the word "unix" in the title galls SCO.
That's probably the code they are objecting to, as well as developers comments, which may refer to GNU licensing terms.
That's probably the code they are objecting to, as well as developers comments, which may refer to GNU licensing terms.
Canoe? Kazoo? GNU
WHich is it: Huked on fonix, or huked on BONG-ix werked for SCO?
Nahh, in their minds, they got it right. But to us, obviously they mixed up "GNU" with "canoe" "Kazoo"... So, either they're up Shit Creek, Ogreville... or they're whistlying from the Kazoo.. stuck in their butts... (and, I thing somebody told them: "PUT one thumb in your *ss, and the other in your mouth. Stand by for me to say: "SWITCH!" ") Well, when hear "eee-eee-ee-eee-" and they don't look like ducks, it's probably the Sore, Cored Orses squeaking up to the US District Court in SF...."
Maybe if IBM and the rest of the non-sco/non-ms world whacks SCO in the mouth they'll fart out those Kazoos, slink back into their canoes, and paddle or dawdle back home to clean up their Singularly Corrupted Overbyte code...heheh heheh
This is NOT the kind of fragmentation we need. I hope SuSE has learned not to play ball with companies on the languishing end of tech but which happen to own a few key pieces of technology which can be Secretively, Cunningly, Obscenely hammered over the heads of the industry.
Now, no matter WHAT the economy does, these dipshits in sco have practically poured grease and razors on the race track BEHIND ms and AHEAD of Linux. Selfish, ARROGANT, AHOLES.
THIS is the kind of crap that for YEARS has had me believing that ALL large corporations MUST have lifespans.
Now, let's make a web page that ties together all the properties owned by ms, sco, and a few other bad seeds. Then, when IT departments have discretionary purchasing authority, they can politically and expediently "overlook" products from such companies. The fastest way for the country and its CEOs to be FORCED to shape their asses up is to stop PURCHASING THEIR PRODUCTS if they are being malicious and destructive to the masses or the little guy trying to make an honest living.
SCO is sullying the otherwise fine people of Santa Cruz. So is effectively Santa SCREWS, or Santa SCROOGE
WHich is it: Huked on fonix, or huked on BONG-ix werked for SCO?
Nahh, in their minds, they got it right. But to us, obviously they mixed up "GNU" with "canoe" "Kazoo"... So, either they're up Shit Creek, Ogreville... or they're whistlying from the Kazoo.. stuck in their butts... (and, I thing somebody told them: "PUT one thumb in your *ss, and the other in your mouth. Stand by for me to say: "SWITCH!" ") Well, when hear "eee-eee-ee-eee-" and they don't look like ducks, it's probably the Sore, Cored Orses squeaking up to the US District Court in SF...."
Maybe if IBM and the rest of the non-sco/non-ms world whacks SCO in the mouth they'll fart out those Kazoos, slink back into their canoes, and paddle or dawdle back home to clean up their Singularly Corrupted Overbyte code...heheh heheh
This is NOT the kind of fragmentation we need. I hope SuSE has learned not to play ball with companies on the languishing end of tech but which happen to own a few key pieces of technology which can be Secretively, Cunningly, Obscenely hammered over the heads of the industry.
Now, no matter WHAT the economy does, these dipshits in sco have practically poured grease and razors on the race track BEHIND ms and AHEAD of Linux. Selfish, ARROGANT, AHOLES.
THIS is the kind of crap that for YEARS has had me believing that ALL large corporations MUST have lifespans.
Now, let's make a web page that ties together all the properties owned by ms, sco, and a few other bad seeds. Then, when IT departments have discretionary purchasing authority, they can politically and expediently "overlook" products from such companies. The fastest way for the country and its CEOs to be FORCED to shape their asses up is to stop PURCHASING THEIR PRODUCTS if they are being malicious and destructive to the masses or the little guy trying to make an honest living.
SCO is sullying the otherwise fine people of Santa Cruz. So is effectively Santa SCREWS, or Santa SCROOGE
I'm gonna look for a bigger rock!
The SCO Group is getting out of the Linux business and into the legal arena.
SCO moving to the legal arena sounds amusing.
I can see the future... "We're losing this case, let's sue the court... and the witnesses... to hell with it, let's sue the whole world!"
A Gartner analyst posits that the IBM lawsuit is a way to make SCO more tempting as a takeover candidate.
I can see a new phrase soon to be used in the business world:
"Think before you act - you don't want to end up like SCO"
SCO has little reason not to put its Linux business on hold. I suspect it has had a hard time selling any copies since it announced the IBM lawsuit.
Yes, this is a typical Microsoft-style manouver, turn something that's hurting you into a positive move - especially when you have no choice.
SCO moving to the legal arena sounds amusing.
I can see the future... "We're losing this case, let's sue the court... and the witnesses... to hell with it, let's sue the whole world!"
A Gartner analyst posits that the IBM lawsuit is a way to make SCO more tempting as a takeover candidate.
I can see a new phrase soon to be used in the business world:
"Think before you act - you don't want to end up like SCO"
SCO has little reason not to put its Linux business on hold. I suspect it has had a hard time selling any copies since it announced the IBM lawsuit.
Yes, this is a typical Microsoft-style manouver, turn something that's hurting you into a positive move - especially when you have no choice.
Well, having read the letter, I must say this - Linux, as is well known, is an independent implementation of POSIX, not a copy of Unix.
It shares this with a whole set of other OSes, free and otherwise - QNX, LynxOS, zVM/Open Edition, Minix, Coherent<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...
SCO is taking on an entire industry. Perhaps all the companies who have independently implemented POSIX-based OSes, should band together and counter-sue SCO - because if they don't<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...
Wesley Parish
"Well, having read the letter, I must say this - Linux, as is well known, is an independent implementation of POSIX, not a copy of Unix.
"It shares this with a whole set of other OSes, free and otherwise - QNX, LynxOS, zVM/Open Edition, Minix, Coherent<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...
Windows NT4, Windows2000, and WindowsXP. Strange but true. Now *that* would be an amusing lawsuit.
"It shares this with a whole set of other OSes, free and otherwise - QNX, LynxOS, zVM/Open Edition, Minix, Coherent<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...
Windows NT4, Windows2000, and WindowsXP. Strange but true. Now *that* would be an amusing lawsuit.
haha haha haha haha haha haha haha haha
haha haha haha haha haha haha haha haha
haha haha haha haha haha haha haha haha
haha haha haha haha haha haha haha haha
haha haha haha haha haha haha haha haha
haha haha haha haha haha haha haha haha
.
.
.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..
(5 years later)
.
.
haha haha haha haha haha haha haha haha
haha haha haha haha haha haha haha haha
haha haha haha haha haha haha haha haha
phew!
Those SCO guys make me laugh.
haha haha haha haha haha haha haha haha
haha haha haha haha haha haha haha haha
haha haha haha haha haha haha haha haha
haha haha haha haha haha haha haha haha
haha haha haha haha haha haha haha haha
.
.
.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..
(5 years later)
.
.
haha haha haha haha haha haha haha haha
haha haha haha haha haha haha haha haha
haha haha haha haha haha haha haha haha
phew!
Those SCO guys make me laugh.
LinuxOpers!! LinuxOpers!! LinuxOpers!! LinuxOpers!!
LinoxUppers!! LinoxUppers!! LinoxUppers!! LinoxUppers!!
I'd like to thank the chortling, King Bee (queen bee) Software Company Emballmer (ballmer) for that.. (Developers!!! Developers!!! Developers!!! Developers!!! ) I thought the man was going to turn blue, leak brown, and slip & slide in sweat across that huge stage..
LinuxOpers!! LinuxOpers!! LinuxOpers!!
C'mon Linus, let's see you at O'Reilly's and SFO.. doin' the funky chicken, struttin' & cackling:
"LinuxOpers!! LinuxOpers!! LinuxOpers!!" as you frisbee (TM?) various distros of Linux / GNU/Linux..
(Well, since this is seriuos or serious or serous business, Linus will rightfully retain his dignity and remain neutral. After all, WE can act asses, but since Linus is the "Man", we must prevent him from getting silly (or at least not silly like mo^i)
Say, GUN/Linux is what happened to SCO. They GUNned their own feet off.
Is all this a nightmare to suck in ms to do something stupid so they can be dragged back into A/T court? It would be interesting if SCO really is doing a TROJAN HORSE on ms, except this trojan is filled with razor blades....Nahh, SCO is going to end up<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...
Smoking Cue-ludes Overnight (Cue: Koo-way or Koo-aye... but not quite as bad as nyoo-keh-luhr, heheheh)
LinoxUppers!! LinoxUppers!! LinoxUppers!! LinoxUppers!!
I'd like to thank the chortling, King Bee (queen bee) Software Company Emballmer (ballmer) for that.. (Developers!!! Developers!!! Developers!!! Developers!!! ) I thought the man was going to turn blue, leak brown, and slip & slide in sweat across that huge stage..
LinuxOpers!! LinuxOpers!! LinuxOpers!!
C'mon Linus, let's see you at O'Reilly's and SFO.. doin' the funky chicken, struttin' & cackling:
"LinuxOpers!! LinuxOpers!! LinuxOpers!!" as you frisbee (TM?) various distros of Linux / GNU/Linux..
(Well, since this is seriuos or serious or serous business, Linus will rightfully retain his dignity and remain neutral. After all, WE can act asses, but since Linus is the "Man", we must prevent him from getting silly (or at least not silly like mo^i)
Say, GUN/Linux is what happened to SCO. They GUNned their own feet off.
Is all this a nightmare to suck in ms to do something stupid so they can be dragged back into A/T court? It would be interesting if SCO really is doing a TROJAN HORSE on ms, except this trojan is filled with razor blades....Nahh, SCO is going to end up<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...
Smoking Cue-ludes Overnight (Cue: Koo-way or Koo-aye... but not quite as bad as nyoo-keh-luhr, heheheh)
If IBM stops their support for db2 on SCO, and Oracle does the same, I can imagine that SCO doesn't exist anymore over a year.
Or does anyone know about other important applications running on SCO
Or does anyone know about other important applications running on SCO
That would imply stopping support for Linux. No can do.
This would be bad to do since customers who are not part of the despute use both SCO and IBM products. Let SCO make an ass of itself, don't turn IBM into the bad guy even if it would be for a small number of companies.
Liability at the end-user? How come?
If companies or people is releasing software that is protected they can be sued (even if they give it away), but a end-user just using it???
If companies or people is releasing software that is protected they can be sued (even if they give it away), but a end-user just using it???
Its called FUD... Fear Uncertainty and Doubt... Coersion through obscurity.
To a certain extent, the RIAA has already covered this ground. When you download an OGG off gnutella you have no way of knowing the legal status of that file, neither did Napster for that matter. The only person that really knows if the file is legit or not is the guy that ripped it...but in both cases Gnutella and GNU/Linux the folks upstream from you have disclaimed liability.
I'm not saying it's right...just pointing out that this same reasoning has failed in the past.
It hardly matters though. Debian already has ports to the Hurd and BSD kernels... Even in a worst case scenario the GNU OS will continue on largely unchanged. How many Linux users would notice the difference between GNU/BSD and GNU/Linux?
I'm not saying it's right...just pointing out that this same reasoning has failed in the past.
It hardly matters though. Debian already has ports to the Hurd and BSD kernels... Even in a worst case scenario the GNU OS will continue on largely unchanged. How many Linux users would notice the difference between GNU/BSD and GNU/Linux?
Linux community is underestimating SCO's strategy
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on May 15, 2003 04:44 PM
In an ideal world SCO would lose its lawsuits and then disappear. But we don't live in an ideal world, and wishful thinking won't help us.
The financial markets are taking SCO seriously - the SCO stock price started to rise a couple of weeks before the lawsuit (this is a typical pattern, there are always insider leaks) and has stayed well above its pre-March level. The "smart money" is definitely betting on at least a partial success for SCO.
The financial markets are taking SCO seriously - the SCO stock price started to rise a couple of weeks before the lawsuit (this is a typical pattern, there are always insider leaks) and has stayed well above its pre-March level. The "smart money" is definitely betting on at least a partial success for SCO.
Re:Linux community is underestimating SCO's strate
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on May 16, 2003 12:34 AM
'Partial success' would include being taken over by a viable company, including IBM. Especially IBM, since they make GOBS of money.
If ya cruise over to the SEC site and search EDGAR, you'll find that there was some selling off of stock prior to this fiasco starting. Interesting...
So if SCO would sue any users of Linux, does that mean SCO would also be suing its partners in the Unitedlinux group? what a crap! I agree to the idea that SCO is just doing this just to gain some money because its product is no longer selling.
Are you being sarcastic or serious? I hope the former.
M$ buying SCO ?
You may have meant it as a joke but it could be just the ploy Caldera was looking for when they did it.
Rather scary that.
Doctor Digital
You may have meant it as a joke but it could be just the ploy Caldera was looking for when they did it.
Rather scary that.
Doctor Digital
Little History MS had a product called Xenix MS spoon of its Unix for Intel to a company in Santa Cruz CA.
MS still has an investment in SCO
Caldera seeded by ex Novell CEO who hates MS.
Linux is killing Novell,
MS losing server market to Linux
(Novell + MS)=SCO vs Linux
MS still has an investment in SCO
Caldera seeded by ex Novell CEO who hates MS.
Linux is killing Novell,
MS losing server market to Linux
(Novell + MS)=SCO vs Linux
anyone with knowledge in laws or just aware about this case - when the legal action will take place, aka trial? in month, two, in six months?
Just want to know,
Peter.
Just want to know,
Peter.
When ohh when is SC blow going to die. Those loosers are the joke of the software industry. SC blow thinks that they have the right to everybodys "HARD" earned money(Microsoft). you guys must be smokin recycled floppy disks. Get a grip and die with dignity, but now it seems its too late you will always go down as the loosers that never could.
Hey all - I have an idea (probably not original - so sue me<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-))
Unless I am mistaken, and please flame me if I am, a lot of UNIX came from academia - in particular Berkerley - and was released openly. At & T then incorporated that code in their UNIX OS - and from what I understand AT&T tried to prevent Berkerley using this through litigation in 1973, and they failed. In other words, AT&T could use the Berkerley code, but they did not have exclusive use of it. This code I believe became incorporated into BSD and also distributed under that license.
From the above it is easy to see that there may be common code between Linux and UNIX, can SCO proove that code originally came from the previous company's proprietory coders? - I doubt it - Can it be prooven to come from Berkerley - probably.
However - There is a lot of open source POSIX stuff around, and it must have been tempting for SCO/Novell/Caldera or whoever to sneak some GPL quietly into their proprietory UNIX, with the court case coming up and full disclosure on all sides required, this will give IBM a chance to examine SCO's proprietory code to see if there is any GPL in there!
Common code - maybe - but who is to say the common code belongs to SCO........
Unless I am mistaken, and please flame me if I am, a lot of UNIX came from academia - in particular Berkerley - and was released openly. At & T then incorporated that code in their UNIX OS - and from what I understand AT&T tried to prevent Berkerley using this through litigation in 1973, and they failed. In other words, AT&T could use the Berkerley code, but they did not have exclusive use of it. This code I believe became incorporated into BSD and also distributed under that license.
From the above it is easy to see that there may be common code between Linux and UNIX, can SCO proove that code originally came from the previous company's proprietory coders? - I doubt it - Can it be prooven to come from Berkerley - probably.
However - There is a lot of open source POSIX stuff around, and it must have been tempting for SCO/Novell/Caldera or whoever to sneak some GPL quietly into their proprietory UNIX, with the court case coming up and full disclosure on all sides required, this will give IBM a chance to examine SCO's proprietory code to see if there is any GPL in there!
Common code - maybe - but who is to say the common code belongs to SCO........
SCO claim that the infringing code is "all over the place" in Linux. They further claim that this remains true even when parts of Linux which were derived from BSD are excluded from the analysis.
Sounds like BS, but we can't really know unless/until they actually release specific instances of the alleged infringement.
I really hope this gets to court, because if it's settled, the question of the IP cleanliness of Linux may hang over the community, albatross-like, for years to come...
Sounds like BS, but we can't really know unless/until they actually release specific instances of the alleged infringement.
I really hope this gets to court, because if it's settled, the question of the IP cleanliness of Linux may hang over the community, albatross-like, for years to come...
I think you got this backwards. Unix was developed by D. Ritchie et al at Bell Labs (AT&T). AT&T didn't see much profit in Unix and it did not fit into their existing busines plans, so AT&T made the educational licensing very attractive. U.C. Berkeley computing department contributed MAJOR improvements and additions to Unix and hence we have BSD Unix and System V Unix. Most commercial unixes are System V based with BSD enhancements. Linux is Sys V inspired with BSD enhancements.
AT&T never gave up copyright control. AT&T sold Unix to Novell. I'm not sure if Caldera Inc. bought the rights to Unix from Novell or whether the old SCO acquired the Unix rights from Novell, but SCO is the current heir to the Unix operating system, whether people like it or not.
I'm keeping my last copy of SCO UnixWare back when the old SCO gave away the media and free not-for-profit use of Unix. Maybe as a reminder of the pre Caldera buyout, if for no other reason.
Me
AT&T never gave up copyright control. AT&T sold Unix to Novell. I'm not sure if Caldera Inc. bought the rights to Unix from Novell or whether the old SCO acquired the Unix rights from Novell, but SCO is the current heir to the Unix operating system, whether people like it or not.
I'm keeping my last copy of SCO UnixWare back when the old SCO gave away the media and free not-for-profit use of Unix. Maybe as a reminder of the pre Caldera buyout, if for no other reason.
Me
The importance of the last suit, Unix System Laboratories v. Berkeley Software Design, Inc., 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19503; 27 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1721, issued 30 Mar 1993, and a key ruling in that case (and other readings related to this case) will be most important to the defense of LINUX. (note that UNIX SYSTEM LABORATORIES, INC. is AT&T's UNIX group at the time of this suit)
From:
http://www.opensource.org/sco-vs-ibm.html
link found in footnotes:
http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/who/dmr/bsdi/930303<nobr>.<wbr></nobr> ruling.txt
Excerpt below is interesting to focus on... as if the judge and jury see the wisdom of this ruling then Linux should be free of SCO's IP (read all for an understanding of the previous IP case):
Quote from part of one ruling in the case:
"After reviewing the affidavits of Plaintiff's and
Defendants, experts, a great deal of uncertainty remains as to what
trade secrets Net2 might contain. One fact does seem clear: the
header files, filenames, and function names used by Defendants are
not trade secrets. Defendants could have printed these off of any
of the thousands of unrestricted copies of Plaintiff's binary
object code. (Kashtan Aff. at 9-11.) Moreover, the nonfunctional
elements of the code, such as comments, cannot be trade secrets
because these elements are minimal and confer no competitive
advantage on Defendants. The copied elements that contain
instructions, such as BREAD and CPIO, might perhaps be trade
secrets, but Defendants' experts have argued persuasively that
these instructions are either in the public domain or otherwise
exempt. As Defendants have repeatedly emphasized, much of 32V
seems to be publicly available.
On the other hand, even it Defendants are correct, it is
not clear whether 32V is publicly available in a form suitable to
BSDI's purposes. There is an enormous difference between an expert
programmer sitting down with a pile of textbooks and disjointed
segments of code to write out an operating system from scratch, and
that same programmer downloading the operating system intact from a
public network. In the first case, the programmer could expend
large amounts of time writing, testing, and debugging the
newly-created system, with an uncertain prospect of immediate
success. But in the second case, immediate success would be
virtually assured. Thus, even if all of the pieces of the 32V code
had been thoroughly revealed in publicly available literature, the
overall organization of the code might remain a trade secret unless
it too had been disclosed."
From:
http://www.opensource.org/sco-vs-ibm.html
link found in footnotes:
http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/who/dmr/bsdi/930303<nobr>.<wbr></nobr> ruling.txt
Excerpt below is interesting to focus on... as if the judge and jury see the wisdom of this ruling then Linux should be free of SCO's IP (read all for an understanding of the previous IP case):
Quote from part of one ruling in the case:
"After reviewing the affidavits of Plaintiff's and
Defendants, experts, a great deal of uncertainty remains as to what
trade secrets Net2 might contain. One fact does seem clear: the
header files, filenames, and function names used by Defendants are
not trade secrets. Defendants could have printed these off of any
of the thousands of unrestricted copies of Plaintiff's binary
object code. (Kashtan Aff. at 9-11.) Moreover, the nonfunctional
elements of the code, such as comments, cannot be trade secrets
because these elements are minimal and confer no competitive
advantage on Defendants. The copied elements that contain
instructions, such as BREAD and CPIO, might perhaps be trade
secrets, but Defendants' experts have argued persuasively that
these instructions are either in the public domain or otherwise
exempt. As Defendants have repeatedly emphasized, much of 32V
seems to be publicly available.
On the other hand, even it Defendants are correct, it is
not clear whether 32V is publicly available in a form suitable to
BSDI's purposes. There is an enormous difference between an expert
programmer sitting down with a pile of textbooks and disjointed
segments of code to write out an operating system from scratch, and
that same programmer downloading the operating system intact from a
public network. In the first case, the programmer could expend
large amounts of time writing, testing, and debugging the
newly-created system, with an uncertain prospect of immediate
success. But in the second case, immediate success would be
virtually assured. Thus, even if all of the pieces of the 32V code
had been thoroughly revealed in publicly available literature, the
overall organization of the code might remain a trade secret unless
it too had been disclosed."
Re:Previous BSD IP case vs AT&T is important!
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on May 16, 2003 02:41 AM
I have several textbooks on Unix which came out of Bell Labs. One of them, the Lions commentary on the kernel source (re-published with SCO's permission in 1995), contains a legal notice that it represents the confidential property of AT&T/Unix System Labs. But two others, Maurice J. Bach's "Design of the UNIX Operating System" and Marc Rochkind's "Advanced UNIX Programming", contain no such notices. Bach's book discloses the algorithms and data structures used internally within the System V kernel; Rochkind is a tutorial on the system call interface. It could be that SCO's lawyers found that some Linux kernel code is similar to its System V counterpart (the so-called "obfuscated" infringement), which wouldn't be surprising because Linus has acknowledged using Bach's book as a reference, along with the POSIX specification. And there were many other books from Bell Labs, such as Kernighan and Pike's book documenting the shell. Leffler and McKusick published a book on BSD internals similar to Bach's.
Then there are the matters of POSIX standardization, the free distribution of Unix source to universities, the Berkeley releases which were eventually sanctioned by AT&T, the cross-fertilization of UNIX (e.g. sockets, X) by outsiders, the UNIX International consortium with Sun, and the expiration of the patents. The bottom line is that there probably is very little "proprietary Unix property" left from the Bell Labs days.
Then there are the matters of POSIX standardization, the free distribution of Unix source to universities, the Berkeley releases which were eventually sanctioned by AT&T, the cross-fertilization of UNIX (e.g. sockets, X) by outsiders, the UNIX International consortium with Sun, and the expiration of the patents. The bottom line is that there probably is very little "proprietary Unix property" left from the Bell Labs days.
I hope you're right! Keep up the tales from the crypt. Maybe SCO will be coughing all the way to the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...
SarCougphlegmgOus
SarCougphlegmgOus
If this court battle lasts for an extended period of time (several years) it only spells bad news for Linux in the workplace. What companies will consider using Linux in the corporate world with the dark cloud of legal action looming over it.
Microsoft must be having a field day with this and you can expect to see the Redmond FUD machine churning out the bullshit at record setting levels. I am of the opinion and have been since this idiotic laysuit was announced that Microsoft will purchase SCO and with their large coffers can spread the BS to delay the deployment of Linux.
Where in the hell are Linus and the other kernel hackers and why aren't they being more vocal defending these accusations against the Linux kernel? I know they have not been mentioned in the suite but but FFS say somthing to defend your work !!!
BSD here I come<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(
Microsoft must be having a field day with this and you can expect to see the Redmond FUD machine churning out the bullshit at record setting levels. I am of the opinion and have been since this idiotic laysuit was announced that Microsoft will purchase SCO and with their large coffers can spread the BS to delay the deployment of Linux.
Where in the hell are Linus and the other kernel hackers and why aren't they being more vocal defending these accusations against the Linux kernel? I know they have not been mentioned in the suite but but FFS say somthing to defend your work !!!
BSD here I come<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(
Anonymous reader wrote: "Microsoft must be having a field day with [the SCO suit]"
\begin{conspiracy_theory}
In fact, could M$ be _backing_ the SCO suit clandestinely, or lending logistical support...?
\end{conspiracy_theory}
>:)
\begin{conspiracy_theory}
In fact, could M$ be _backing_ the SCO suit clandestinely, or lending logistical support...?
\end{conspiracy_theory}
>:)
lol<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... their products suck(ed) anyway.
For every $1 SCO throws at the lawsuit IBM will throw $1000. They should just give up and start making washing machines.
For every $1 SCO throws at the lawsuit IBM will throw $1000. They should just give up and start making washing machines.
Are you nuts? washing machines? Dude, I still want to own my own washing machine free and clear and not be sued for it!
Maybe toilet paper. If they decide to sue you for using it, you can just flush the evidence. Besides, from the way they put Linux together you can expect them to only make 1-ply paper. No one would buy it and they would end up out of business. It is really a win/win situation if they change to toilet paper.
On second thought, they could make digital toilet paper, send it as a virus attachment that recorded personal information and created a law suit filed against the users of the product. They could win billions of dollars in suits against anyone using Microsoft products. I guess that would never happen, huh? Microsoft invested a lot of money in them. Oh well.
Another company Noorda will run into the ground. SCO will probably suspend all development and sales, hire a bunch of lawyers and go into the copyright infringement business. Idiots.
But you all have said everything that needs to be said. However, I will tell you that I sent them a nasty-gram, and when I get a response, I'll post it here.
Would anyone happen to know if any blocks of SCO stock recently changed hands. Saayyy towards the Redmond, Washington region somewhere, for instance<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...?
It does give that impression, doesn't it!
Can you imagine where the players on the SCO side of things had their data "bases" covered by owning large amounts of SCO and large amounts of Microsoft? Where any customers going to Linux would hurt them either way! Ouch!
If you think about it, you have to understand that Linux would have eventually been destroyed. We all thought the offensive would come from Microsoft, an easy battle for linux. But it came from SCO. "thems the breaks, kid." You see Linux could easily have defeated the monopolizing billy-boy. SCO however is a big part of the UNIX community. That means that Linux is going up against someone who knows everything. And that will spell trouble. If SCO wins, Linus torvalds and the manufacturers of the commercial linux distros could see a very rocky end. we may all have to move to FreeBSD(God, Please NO.) but really will it matter. I think not. Linux users are Linux users, not to use Linux but to implement control and stability. Can't we do that with BSD or something else. As long as its not Microsoft Does it matter? BSD is growing too. Can't we just use that. If Not, than maybe its time for Linus and the rest of our community to just develop something different.
Fair enough. But not without a fight... BSD is a great platform, and one I'd use as an alternative at work, but Linux is what I know and love. I don't think SCO fully understands what they're setting themselves up for, going after bottom-up systems like GNU and Linux. The movement made a place for itself before its corporate sponsorship came to pass, it can and *will* do so again. Does SCO think they get every copy of the code destroyed? Whole governments have already taken up the banner, and not everyone on the planet simply bows to SCO's paid-for 'right' to sue those who don't pay them hard cash...
Power to the people! And God bless the fact that the intellectual property laws in the U.S. aren't (and thanks to the current administration's forgeign policy likely won't be) exported to the rest of the world, FBI raids and secret-police-style monitoring of people aside, of course... I hope the U.N. and the global community takes note of the consequences of following blindly down the path of letting a single country dictate to them what's legal and not legal in their own homes and workplaces, lest we all live under the corporate flag of 'free trade'.
Don't let the flies obscure the view of the milk and honey...
Power to the people! And God bless the fact that the intellectual property laws in the U.S. aren't (and thanks to the current administration's forgeign policy likely won't be) exported to the rest of the world, FBI raids and secret-police-style monitoring of people aside, of course... I hope the U.N. and the global community takes note of the consequences of following blindly down the path of letting a single country dictate to them what's legal and not legal in their own homes and workplaces, lest we all live under the corporate flag of 'free trade'.
Don't let the flies obscure the view of the milk and honey...
But hey, I'm a admitted opensource whack-o with additional neo-communistic views (same poster), so decide for yourself.
Don't think lawsuits against Linux will stop it being developed elsewhere.
I'm the one who posted Linux Lawsuit. I feel the same way. Linux is what I know and love. I have used it for years now. Granted im still a beginner, but sometimes the fight can't be won. What do we do if we lose. I'm not saying leave Linux for dead. i'm saying to be prepared for the possibility that we might lose this one. I know we want to finish this on top. But if that is not going to happen then we should prepare. And my development options were not going to change linux into something entirely different. I was just suggesting changes to the behavior to make it less like UNIX. That would help to prevent this from happening again. That was all I meant.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/biztech/05/15/micros<nobr>o<wbr></nobr> ft.linux.reut/index.html
Yah right, hey SCO, see what I did, I removed your software, it's gone, kaput, ditto, vwalla. I don't use you no more. Take that you evil, Bill Gates counterpart............I have the last laugh now.
I hate it when some moron, not George W, takes away my happiness to better theirs. We sould send SCO to Iraq
I hate it when some moron, not George W, takes away my happiness to better theirs. We sould send SCO to Iraq
Lets see how many lawyers want to sign up to take on thousands of companies and governments globally, and 20 million plus people in virtually everywhere in the world, and do it with SCO's financial baking...
Its obvious SCO is trying to spook the community into keeping quiet when it comes to public criticism over their suite with IBM. Talkin' about a strategy that can backfire... Lawsuites won't make Linux go away. The gene's out of the bottle.
No corporation owns it, and no corporation is going to crush it. The day the corporate world could is the day it won't matter any more...
Its obvious SCO is trying to spook the community into keeping quiet when it comes to public criticism over their suite with IBM. Talkin' about a strategy that can backfire... Lawsuites won't make Linux go away. The gene's out of the bottle.
No corporation owns it, and no corporation is going to crush it. The day the corporate world could is the day it won't matter any more...
Is SCO planning to leave IT business and enter entertainment business to entertain the IT world... Need to be careful they may file a law suit for we not paying for this entertainment.
-SCO released caldera under the GNU license
-the GNU says that the code is free
-caldera use the same kernel as suse, redhat an so on
SO SCO GIVE THIS CODE UNDER THE GNU LICENSE !
dagoo@aon.at
-the GNU says that the code is free
-caldera use the same kernel as suse, redhat an so on
SO SCO GIVE THIS CODE UNDER THE GNU LICENSE !
dagoo@aon.at
This is correct. Follow it to it's next conclusion.
-SCO recinded Caldera's source code from free distribution.
-SCO violates the GPL
-The GPL board, backed by the entire linux industry, sues SCO for multiple billions of dollars for it's violation of IP.
-Game over
-SCO recinded Caldera's source code from free distribution.
-SCO violates the GPL
-The GPL board, backed by the entire linux industry, sues SCO for multiple billions of dollars for it's violation of IP.
-Game over
Linus Torvalds, father of the Linux kernel and leader of the open-source project that has captured the imagination of the entire IT world, had this reaction when I asked if he had a comment on the latest SCO news:
Not much of a comment. I'd personally just like to know what they claim infringes, since they themselves seem to be quite confused about it (at one point they said that it wasn't the kernel but something else, and at another point they said it was).
I suspect they noticed that as long as they distribute Linux, they are themselves bound by the GPL. Which (among other things) clearly states that you can't limit recipients rights, including the right to further distribute it (without any limitations further down the chain either).
So by distributing Linux they possibly made their own case weaker — anybody who gets _any_ distribution from them (even very indirectly), they cannot limit without themselves being in violation of the GPL.
And I suspect some SCO lawyer just woke up to this fact and realized that they haven't made money any other way, and if their main cash cow is going to be litigation, they'd better avoid doing anything that makes their case any weaker than it already is.
Not much of a comment. I'd personally just like to know what they claim infringes, since they themselves seem to be quite confused about it (at one point they said that it wasn't the kernel but something else, and at another point they said it was).
I suspect they noticed that as long as they distribute Linux, they are themselves bound by the GPL. Which (among other things) clearly states that you can't limit recipients rights, including the right to further distribute it (without any limitations further down the chain either).
So by distributing Linux they possibly made their own case weaker — anybody who gets _any_ distribution from them (even very indirectly), they cannot limit without themselves being in violation of the GPL.
And I suspect some SCO lawyer just woke up to this fact and realized that they haven't made money any other way, and if their main cash cow is going to be litigation, they'd better avoid doing anything that makes their case any weaker than it already is.
I'm ready to contribute 40 hrs/week for the next
8 weeks to eliminate any code that might be
infringing.
Take me plus the couple of other hundreds
of people like me plus the corporate programmers
paid to work on Linux, well, it won't take
long to fix any potential problems.
The only major problem, as I see it, is organizing
all the talent.
8 weeks to eliminate any code that might be
infringing.
Take me plus the couple of other hundreds
of people like me plus the corporate programmers
paid to work on Linux, well, it won't take
long to fix any potential problems.
The only major problem, as I see it, is organizing
all the talent.
Well, why not do it in a CVS Server???? Then CVS saves the day! (or some might pray/hope...)
Besides, MySQL or PostgreSQL and other databases can help. Or, maybe this is a good time to enhance-webify(with MD5/SSL)-Korganizer, Gnome-Cal, or Mr. Project could be the way.
Just e-mail and MD5 the segments of code around and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... Well, logistically this'd be a NIGHTMARE, wouldn't it?
OTOH, this could be a GOLDEN opportunity to approach manufacturers for "bottoms-up" hardware access. Imagine "clean-break" Linux that excapes the threats of SCO. Could this possbily lead to brainstorming and resurgence in the Hardware Sector?
Imagine all those Linux IPOs taking off again, except THIS time, it's for REAL. Tablets, clothes, mice, etc.
But, while the SWAT team is it it, the BEST of the best SWATters had better be decompiling every ms product under the sun to make sure that if ms is infringing that the are WHACKED to the tune of BILLIONS so that all this SWAT deployment will be paid off and then some...
With all the conspiracy theories going around, it's possible this is an ms attempt, not to buy SCO, but to make SCO implode itself while the SCO-be-Dos wank thinking they'll be enriched by ms. Meanwhile, the Linux coders are out running 'round like headless chickens trying to verfiy litigation won't come their way. THus, Linux developments are dramatically slowed, tech support for kernel and esoteric issues are trickled, and people rush back in throngs to ms.
Just a 2cent theory....
IOW, ms could be pulling a Napoleon on SCO while on or both pull it on Linux.
MEANING: KEEP the watch posted on all points of the compass and report any movements or suspicious activity...
Think Tactically but strategically...
Besides, MySQL or PostgreSQL and other databases can help. Or, maybe this is a good time to enhance-webify(with MD5/SSL)-Korganizer, Gnome-Cal, or Mr. Project could be the way.
Just e-mail and MD5 the segments of code around and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... Well, logistically this'd be a NIGHTMARE, wouldn't it?
OTOH, this could be a GOLDEN opportunity to approach manufacturers for "bottoms-up" hardware access. Imagine "clean-break" Linux that excapes the threats of SCO. Could this possbily lead to brainstorming and resurgence in the Hardware Sector?
Imagine all those Linux IPOs taking off again, except THIS time, it's for REAL. Tablets, clothes, mice, etc.
But, while the SWAT team is it it, the BEST of the best SWATters had better be decompiling every ms product under the sun to make sure that if ms is infringing that the are WHACKED to the tune of BILLIONS so that all this SWAT deployment will be paid off and then some...
With all the conspiracy theories going around, it's possible this is an ms attempt, not to buy SCO, but to make SCO implode itself while the SCO-be-Dos wank thinking they'll be enriched by ms. Meanwhile, the Linux coders are out running 'round like headless chickens trying to verfiy litigation won't come their way. THus, Linux developments are dramatically slowed, tech support for kernel and esoteric issues are trickled, and people rush back in throngs to ms.
Just a 2cent theory....
IOW, ms could be pulling a Napoleon on SCO while on or both pull it on Linux.
MEANING: KEEP the watch posted on all points of the compass and report any movements or suspicious activity...
Think Tactically but strategically...
kernel.org... Its always been there.
I wouldn't make it a point to talk about decompiling MS or anyone's closed code... Bad legal karma... But it does make a good point:
HOW do WE know the closed source people aren't stealing from GPL'ed code? Who's the watchdog? Oh, yeh, NOONE! One more reason to love opensource (paying attention here?)... This wouldn't have even been an issue if the platform in question had SCO's or someone else's closed licensing. I can imagine IBM could use that one in court, on top of the BSD case, the fact that SCO released the same GPL code AS LINUX themselves, and host of other things... Reverse FUD psychology...
Remember, its not just a platform, its a social and economic movement on a global scale...
I wouldn't make it a point to talk about decompiling MS or anyone's closed code... Bad legal karma... But it does make a good point:
HOW do WE know the closed source people aren't stealing from GPL'ed code? Who's the watchdog? Oh, yeh, NOONE! One more reason to love opensource (paying attention here?)... This wouldn't have even been an issue if the platform in question had SCO's or someone else's closed licensing. I can imagine IBM could use that one in court, on top of the BSD case, the fact that SCO released the same GPL code AS LINUX themselves, and host of other things... Reverse FUD psychology...
Remember, its not just a platform, its a social and economic movement on a global scale...
I am just curious what flavor of Crack they are smoking. It must be some real mind bending stuff.
SCO is a dying OS, its been dying and its pretty much dead. They should have got out of the game long ago. If they were not expecting a huge backlash from the Open Source Folks, they are mistaken.
Any Pitty I had for them is gone now.
# man sco
A company that used to market an operating Unix based Operating system. Currently (2004) SCO now sales Crack and crack Accessories.
SCO is a dying OS, its been dying and its pretty much dead. They should have got out of the game long ago. If they were not expecting a huge backlash from the Open Source Folks, they are mistaken.
Any Pitty I had for them is gone now.
# man sco
A company that used to market an operating Unix based Operating system. Currently (2004) SCO now sales Crack and crack Accessories.
Does this not seem like a Microsoft pattern, where companies with a competing product get bought out and then pieces of the product eventually get incorporated into MS products and the remainder gets shut down. Does this not look like an Open Source version of this ploy, where if there is any hint of copyright ownership, buy out the company that may own the copyright then initiate copyright litigation to scare the developers and users. Who actually owns SCO and what is their affilitation to Microsoft?
This might seem obviouse to everyone but doesn't the GPL protect against this? Seeing as how SCO had a Linux distribution with all the code in it (although they may hold the copyright) GPLed and therfore can be copied and modified as anyone sees fit. They are bound by the GLP and although any future updates to linux they make they could put under a different licence but cannot hold control of the original code or modifications that other people make to it.
They released under the GPL so shouldn't that take away thier rights to any, alleged, unix code that is in linux?
I wonder if IBM will use this as a defense...or even to get the case thrown out of court?
Are there holes in my argument? Is this a useful defense?
hook
They released under the GPL so shouldn't that take away thier rights to any, alleged, unix code that is in linux?
I wonder if IBM will use this as a defense...or even to get the case thrown out of court?
Are there holes in my argument? Is this a useful defense?
hook
Brian Kahin(?) told at Dorinth-Conference (Eurolinux/FFII) in Brussels, Belgium that there are to groups that use sw patents in lawsuits.
1. patent grabber lawyers
2. failed companys
André
"In the field of industrial patents in particular we shall have seriously to examine whether the award of a monopoly privilege is really the most appropriate and effective form of reward for the kind of risk bearing which investment in scientific research involves."
F. von. Hayek, Individualism and Economic Order, 1948.
1. patent grabber lawyers
2. failed companys
André
"In the field of industrial patents in particular we shall have seriously to examine whether the award of a monopoly privilege is really the most appropriate and effective form of reward for the kind of risk bearing which investment in scientific research involves."
F. von. Hayek, Individualism and Economic Order, 1948.
This is a conspiracy with Mico$oft!! Watch out! do not be fooled!
Don't be stupid. Microsofts not about getting in bed with SCO. They are practically opposing forces in a giant fantasy game. SCO may be the current evil, but that doesn't all of a sudden mean that they are secretly making delas with microsoft. Get a life and wake up.
What if... x or y? Future options = brainstorm now
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on May 16, 2003 08:59 PM
If and only if there is an adverse postion taken by the court that is not in favor of Linux... then, there must be options!
We would be irresponsible if we did not consider what the full range of options would be... NOW!
Sample Options:
a) If the court upholds the former BSD suit, then use that code and apply GPL to new version of it.
b) Take out the offending code and replace it (the only problem will be if other limitations would be imposed by the court)
c) Have the government(s), by legal action, buy SCO or take over the UNIX assets of SCO (if SCO does not want to sell then force them to sell due to national security reasons it is best that LINUX be kept alive). Then the government declares LINUX in the public domain. Note: During one of the last World Wars there was a problem with a patent on an airplane design that resulted in the government having to take that over due to the need for it to be usable by all airplane manufacturers to create planes for the war effort (the remote controlled aircraft used by the US military are most likely coded using a varient of UNIX - so the government can not afford to have it's code be controlled by a proprietary company - it is best that it be open source and usable by any government agency - NASA, NSA, Defense, Homeland Security, etc...with no strings attached). If this happened then Apple, IBM, or other corporations (even Microsoft) could operate from a standard that would drive innovation for the benefit of mankind.
Comment: If SCO wins... and there are court restrictions on LINUX, BSD and others (based on a ruling that SCO "owns UNIX")... then, nothing good can come of that! So all options must be considered now.
d)_________?
We would be irresponsible if we did not consider what the full range of options would be... NOW!
Sample Options:
a) If the court upholds the former BSD suit, then use that code and apply GPL to new version of it.
b) Take out the offending code and replace it (the only problem will be if other limitations would be imposed by the court)
c) Have the government(s), by legal action, buy SCO or take over the UNIX assets of SCO (if SCO does not want to sell then force them to sell due to national security reasons it is best that LINUX be kept alive). Then the government declares LINUX in the public domain. Note: During one of the last World Wars there was a problem with a patent on an airplane design that resulted in the government having to take that over due to the need for it to be usable by all airplane manufacturers to create planes for the war effort (the remote controlled aircraft used by the US military are most likely coded using a varient of UNIX - so the government can not afford to have it's code be controlled by a proprietary company - it is best that it be open source and usable by any government agency - NASA, NSA, Defense, Homeland Security, etc...with no strings attached). If this happened then Apple, IBM, or other corporations (even Microsoft) could operate from a standard that would drive innovation for the benefit of mankind.
Comment: If SCO wins... and there are court restrictions on LINUX, BSD and others (based on a ruling that SCO "owns UNIX")... then, nothing good can come of that! So all options must be considered now.
d)_________?
One glaring error in the SCO diatribe is the review process that open source software goes through. Many individuals contribute code and many individuals review the contributions of others, then if the code passes muster is it added to the kernel. One expects that many of the developers have classical Unix training and would recognize Unix code if it was submitted. The thought that every individual can willy-nilly add to the official kernel is just a blandant mis-statement to serve SCO purposes.
I also thought that much of the early unix code had been published without copyright by one of the previous owners, though it was a inadvertent and may be moot for this issue.
Oh, by the way, SCO is still publishing source for Linux on their FTP server. They are still bound by GPL license included in that document.
If a customer of Caldera were to sue Caldera for distributing unlicensed unix code in their Linux code thus exposing the customer to potential damages and lawsuits, how would Caldera respond?
They would have to either admit liability or claim ownership of Unix and recognize the legal status of the GPL and any code they included in their distribution. Do you run Caldera linux and feel betrayed? Try a legal remedy! Remember to include thier admission letter as evidence of the misconduct. Simply warning your customer does not relieve you of liability or did Caldera only warn Lunix user of other distributions?
SCO should get everything they deserve.
I also thought that much of the early unix code had been published without copyright by one of the previous owners, though it was a inadvertent and may be moot for this issue.
Oh, by the way, SCO is still publishing source for Linux on their FTP server. They are still bound by GPL license included in that document.
If a customer of Caldera were to sue Caldera for distributing unlicensed unix code in their Linux code thus exposing the customer to potential damages and lawsuits, how would Caldera respond?
They would have to either admit liability or claim ownership of Unix and recognize the legal status of the GPL and any code they included in their distribution. Do you run Caldera linux and feel betrayed? Try a legal remedy! Remember to include thier admission letter as evidence of the misconduct. Simply warning your customer does not relieve you of liability or did Caldera only warn Lunix user of other distributions?
SCO should get everything they deserve.
I can't help but feel that somehow MicroSoft has a hand in this. And that they are using this to further promote their new servers. Didn't MS buy out Caldera at one time?
Jay
Jay
This is obviously just an attempt to grab the copyrights of linux before it explodes. Linux is taking over. Linux is the most powerful operating system for the PC ever, so powerful in fact that linux could defend itself. I think there is a lawyer command somewhere in bash ( ha ha). For real folks, SCO just wants a piece of the pie, a pie that doesn't exist. They want royalties for anonymous work done by 1000's of linux users around the world. They think that one person owns linux. Nobody owns linux. It's by the users for the users!
"If we work together we can bring down Microsoft, and SCO. Don't forget where we came from (Windows ), and you won't forget what/why you are fighting!"
I LOVE LINUX!
"If we work together we can bring down Microsoft, and SCO. Don't forget where we came from (Windows ), and you won't forget what/why you are fighting!"
I LOVE LINUX!
SCO says COMMERCIAL Linux users should worry. Home brew distros and non-commercial users don't sound like a direct target.
No MONEY in it for them, and no way of going after them all. Linux wouldn't die, it would only become the industry's worst nightmare, a niche for the disgruntled and forsaken, the people the system let down that now have it in for the system... Basically, no change from now except for a new darker, less compromising, even more driven purpose and direction that noone in business to make a profit with minimal hassle is looking for... Penguins with a cause.
I could be wrong, but time would tell in that event. I'd stick to legal contestation myself, but its a big world out there and I'd venture to speculate about how some in the community (in the techie culture, NOT just linux users...) can get where RIGHTS and beliefs are trampled on for the sake of a few greedy businessmen's bank accounts, especially when those people didn't even WRITE the code they claim was stolen from them (not to mention that even the code they claim is stolen predates their bought-into copyrights). They (SCO) are little more than useless carion in many's view...
Linux is an community many go to keep from going mental over dealing with those kind of people. Linux gives us a sense of control, that our work and skill is directly related to what we get out of our system. Upset this balance at your own risk...
No MONEY in it for them, and no way of going after them all. Linux wouldn't die, it would only become the industry's worst nightmare, a niche for the disgruntled and forsaken, the people the system let down that now have it in for the system... Basically, no change from now except for a new darker, less compromising, even more driven purpose and direction that noone in business to make a profit with minimal hassle is looking for... Penguins with a cause.
I could be wrong, but time would tell in that event. I'd stick to legal contestation myself, but its a big world out there and I'd venture to speculate about how some in the community (in the techie culture, NOT just linux users...) can get where RIGHTS and beliefs are trampled on for the sake of a few greedy businessmen's bank accounts, especially when those people didn't even WRITE the code they claim was stolen from them (not to mention that even the code they claim is stolen predates their bought-into copyrights). They (SCO) are little more than useless carion in many's view...
Linux is an community many go to keep from going mental over dealing with those kind of people. Linux gives us a sense of control, that our work and skill is directly related to what we get out of our system. Upset this balance at your own risk...
"The love of money is the root of all evil."
I've never seen a better example of this proverb. If I didn't know better, I'd say people ought to throw all the money away, and come up with some new way of trade that doesn't allow for this kind of dirty manipulation.
I've never seen a better example of this proverb. If I didn't know better, I'd say people ought to throw all the money away, and come up with some new way of trade that doesn't allow for this kind of dirty manipulation.
You first<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)
Ok this post is so full of holes an elephant could walk through it.
First your quote says "the love of money is the root of all evil" not money is evil.
Money is not evil it is perhaps the most democritizing invention ever concived.
Look at history bub. Money allowed the rise of the trade craft classes which took power away from the government (read tyrants) and away from orginized religion.
Perhaps you might have suggested throwing away our love of money.
Next wouldn't it be a better idea to first come up with a better system and then throw away our money. Instead of throwing it away first. I mean calling for the end of civilization and then hopeing for new, more, humane one to rise up from it's ashes is a little optimistic.
Do you honestly believe people would behave nice to each other without a way to transfer thier skills, like programming, into food?
Your proposal sounds a bit like what they did in Cambodia. Ever hear of the Khmer Rouge? They eliminated money, but they sure didn't have a problem commiting evil.
Please for the safety of the rest of human race pull your head out of your ass.
First your quote says "the love of money is the root of all evil" not money is evil.
Money is not evil it is perhaps the most democritizing invention ever concived.
Look at history bub. Money allowed the rise of the trade craft classes which took power away from the government (read tyrants) and away from orginized religion.
Perhaps you might have suggested throwing away our love of money.
Next wouldn't it be a better idea to first come up with a better system and then throw away our money. Instead of throwing it away first. I mean calling for the end of civilization and then hopeing for new, more, humane one to rise up from it's ashes is a little optimistic.
Do you honestly believe people would behave nice to each other without a way to transfer thier skills, like programming, into food?
Your proposal sounds a bit like what they did in Cambodia. Ever hear of the Khmer Rouge? They eliminated money, but they sure didn't have a problem commiting evil.
Please for the safety of the rest of human race pull your head out of your ass.
He said the LOVE of money, not money itself. And that quote comes from the Bible (1 Timothy 6:10) "For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows." And I think the Bible might be just a teensy bit more right than you.
I am Developer working since 1987. Through all these years I could not see (and I have been in many places) so many SCO or any other UNIX installations. Only large ordganizations. There was the time that some of us believed that Microsoft is gonna win.
In the recent years, the reneisance of UNIX in the general area such us Small and Medium Enterprises, is THANKS TO THE LINUX community and the Operating system itself. Today we see it working as commercial installations when few years ago it was a "gig" stuff. Linux saved as..es of companies providing commercial UNIX and that is the reality because otherwise all this army of "Microsoft trained buddies would anly install those MS Servers". The interest in this type of OS is growing not declining anymore and this is fact.
So now, when finally SCO feels strong enough, it puts threats against its former allies. Why ???
Let me ask you a question: HOW MUCH SCO OWES LINUX and its Community for popularization of UNIX?
But where the many talks... How nice.
In the recent years, the reneisance of UNIX in the general area such us Small and Medium Enterprises, is THANKS TO THE LINUX community and the Operating system itself. Today we see it working as commercial installations when few years ago it was a "gig" stuff. Linux saved as..es of companies providing commercial UNIX and that is the reality because otherwise all this army of "Microsoft trained buddies would anly install those MS Servers". The interest in this type of OS is growing not declining anymore and this is fact.
So now, when finally SCO feels strong enough, it puts threats against its former allies. Why ???
Let me ask you a question: HOW MUCH SCO OWES LINUX and its Community for popularization of UNIX?
But where the many talks... How nice.
What happens, when independent programmers, working in clean-room manner, come up with EXACTLY the same algorithm as the professionals? It's TOUGH! The professionals get in there first.
If SCO can prove that their code has been "shared about", REGARDLESS of whom generated it, or whether or not the programmers SAW any SysV code or techniques, and that code has appeared in products not under their umbrella, then they DO have rights - it's called patents, folks.
The main objection seems to be that SCO THINKS that programmers who SAW SysV code and techniques, put it into Linux, and deliberately HID the fact, and that's why they're gunning. How the hang are SCO going to prove that? The ones that SCO OUGHT to gun for are the programmers concerned (those they can prove violated their agreements with SCO), not whoever happens to be holding the "legal" reins of the disparate fog we call the Linux community.
Could Microsoft be the culprit behind SCO ?
All very interesting, !!!
But what if SCO is right ?????
and some naughty linux programmer has 'done the dirty' of the linux community ???
Im reading alot of denials here ?
isnt linux source code maintained by specific people who coordinate groups of programmers, and maintainthe CVS etc, who pass the source code for inclusion into linux. They need their asses kicked as they are the ones responsible.
What if SCO does come up with "line for line" code lifted from UNIX. (and the judge agrees!!).
Linux will take a possibly fatal blow.
It will loose SO MUCH credibility.
I dont want that to happen, and the Linux community should take action to ensure that there is no SUS code. It should not be too hard to do,
SCO did it...
This "incident" is a good argument for "closed" source code... where all programmers are controlled.
Regards all<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..
Im a big linux fan, this SCO thing makes me sad and worried.
But what if SCO is right ?????
and some naughty linux programmer has 'done the dirty' of the linux community ???
Im reading alot of denials here ?
isnt linux source code maintained by specific people who coordinate groups of programmers, and maintainthe CVS etc, who pass the source code for inclusion into linux. They need their asses kicked as they are the ones responsible.
What if SCO does come up with "line for line" code lifted from UNIX. (and the judge agrees!!).
Linux will take a possibly fatal blow.
It will loose SO MUCH credibility.
I dont want that to happen, and the Linux community should take action to ensure that there is no SUS code. It should not be too hard to do,
SCO did it...
This "incident" is a good argument for "closed" source code... where all programmers are controlled.
Regards all<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..
Im a big linux fan, this SCO thing makes me sad and worried.
Apparent or ostensible authority... & SCO v. Linux
http://newsforge.com/newsforge/03/05/17/1238221.s<nobr>h<wbr></nobr> tml?tid=23
by Anonymous Reader on 2003.05.17 22:45 (#52732)
Since SCO was, before now, not restricting innocent 3rd party use of any LINUX related IP... then the innocent 3rd party users/customers of LINUX distributors could be free from any financial responsibility that could otherwise, if the courts hold that SCO's IP is extended to all of LINUX, be OWED to SCO. LINUX could still live and users of LINUX could still use LINUX (in it's currently acquired/purchased state for as long as they want...) without SCO being able to do anything about it. This is because of apparent or ostensible authority "agency" Law (mixed in with the content and meaning of the LINUX GPL that SCO is still party to)!
In the absence of any yet ruling from the court as to the current status of SCO's IP claims against IBM or any ruling from any action directly against LINUX... the status quo concerning LINUX may continue to exist when you combine "apparent or ostensible authority" with the fact that SCO has had extensive involvement with LINUX (exposing them to the LINUX GPL)... then, by the virtue of fact that SCO having distributed LINUX and with SCO still a contract member of the LINUX GPL governed UnitedLinux, MAY mean that any and all LINUX users are free to use LINUX (as downloaded or distributed by any LINUX distributor) because of apparent or ostensible authority granted by SCO via SCO's involvement in LINUX (thus freeing any user of a need to comply with the rumored 15,000 letters that SCO may have sent out to some corporate users of LINUX).
It could be implied that any web site or distributor of LINUX acted with apparent or ostensible autority (as an agent) granted by the LINUX GPL, and thus SCO, freeing the innocent 3rd party customer (any LINUX user) of any financial liability owed at any time to SCO by the nature of the LINUX GPL and any license governed by the LINUX GPL... as the fact is that SCO contributed to GPL LINUX for many years (as a knowing and willing party to the LINUX GPL)! SCO and the LINUX GPL may be now one and the same because of the history of the deep SCO relationship with LINUX (and her GPL)!
This conclusion appears valid, and if so... it would mean that it would be very difficult for SCO to enforce any liability or any premium from any innocent 3rd party user of LINUX (to date - until the court could rule on their IP claims whereupon the situation could or might not change, depending). Apparent or ostensible authority may have been the reason why SCO has been sending threatening letters to companies that may or may not be using LINUX (who would be innocent 3rd parties in this SCO v. LINUX scenerio). AND when thoughts of defensive action by these innocent 3rd parties is contemplated to an extreme... these innocent 3rd party users of LINUX could maybe find cause, and maybe be a valid cause, for the receivers of such threatening letters from SCO to sue SCO for harrasment).
This is a mouthful but read up on apparent or ostensible authority AND read the LINUX GPL and what conclusions are then reached.
From:
http://www.crmlaw.com/articles/agency.htm
"However, there is a doctrine in the law known as “apparent agency” which can defeat those expectations and impose liabilities where none were anticipated or intended. The doctrine was defined most recently in a significant decision by the Illinois Supreme Court in Petrovich v. Share Health Plan of Illinois Inc., 188 Ill. 2d 17, in the following excerpt:
“Apparent authority, also known as ostensible authority, has been a part of Illinois jurisprudence for more than 140 years. … Under the doctrine, a principal will be bound not only by the authority that it actually gives to another, but also by the authority that it appears to give. … Where the principal creates the appearance of authority, a court will not hear the principal’s denials of agency to the prejudice of an innocent third party, who has been led to reasonably rely upon the agency and is harmed as a result".
From:
http://dictionary.law.com/definition2.asp ?selected =2411&bold=%7C%7C
Read the rest of this comment...
http://newsforge.com/newsforge/03/05/17/1238221.s<nobr>h<wbr></nobr> tml?tid=23
by Anonymous Reader on 2003.05.17 22:45 (#52732)
Since SCO was, before now, not restricting innocent 3rd party use of any LINUX related IP... then the innocent 3rd party users/customers of LINUX distributors could be free from any financial responsibility that could otherwise, if the courts hold that SCO's IP is extended to all of LINUX, be OWED to SCO. LINUX could still live and users of LINUX could still use LINUX (in it's currently acquired/purchased state for as long as they want...) without SCO being able to do anything about it. This is because of apparent or ostensible authority "agency" Law (mixed in with the content and meaning of the LINUX GPL that SCO is still party to)!
In the absence of any yet ruling from the court as to the current status of SCO's IP claims against IBM or any ruling from any action directly against LINUX... the status quo concerning LINUX may continue to exist when you combine "apparent or ostensible authority" with the fact that SCO has had extensive involvement with LINUX (exposing them to the LINUX GPL)... then, by the virtue of fact that SCO having distributed LINUX and with SCO still a contract member of the LINUX GPL governed UnitedLinux, MAY mean that any and all LINUX users are free to use LINUX (as downloaded or distributed by any LINUX distributor) because of apparent or ostensible authority granted by SCO via SCO's involvement in LINUX (thus freeing any user of a need to comply with the rumored 15,000 letters that SCO may have sent out to some corporate users of LINUX).
It could be implied that any web site or distributor of LINUX acted with apparent or ostensible autority (as an agent) granted by the LINUX GPL, and thus SCO, freeing the innocent 3rd party customer (any LINUX user) of any financial liability owed at any time to SCO by the nature of the LINUX GPL and any license governed by the LINUX GPL... as the fact is that SCO contributed to GPL LINUX for many years (as a knowing and willing party to the LINUX GPL)! SCO and the LINUX GPL may be now one and the same because of the history of the deep SCO relationship with LINUX (and her GPL)!
This conclusion appears valid, and if so... it would mean that it would be very difficult for SCO to enforce any liability or any premium from any innocent 3rd party user of LINUX (to date - until the court could rule on their IP claims whereupon the situation could or might not change, depending). Apparent or ostensible authority may have been the reason why SCO has been sending threatening letters to companies that may or may not be using LINUX (who would be innocent 3rd parties in this SCO v. LINUX scenerio). AND when thoughts of defensive action by these innocent 3rd parties is contemplated to an extreme... these innocent 3rd party users of LINUX could maybe find cause, and maybe be a valid cause, for the receivers of such threatening letters from SCO to sue SCO for harrasment).
This is a mouthful but read up on apparent or ostensible authority AND read the LINUX GPL and what conclusions are then reached.
From:
http://www.crmlaw.com/articles/agency.htm
"However, there is a doctrine in the law known as “apparent agency” which can defeat those expectations and impose liabilities where none were anticipated or intended. The doctrine was defined most recently in a significant decision by the Illinois Supreme Court in Petrovich v. Share Health Plan of Illinois Inc., 188 Ill. 2d 17, in the following excerpt:
“Apparent authority, also known as ostensible authority, has been a part of Illinois jurisprudence for more than 140 years. … Under the doctrine, a principal will be bound not only by the authority that it actually gives to another, but also by the authority that it appears to give. … Where the principal creates the appearance of authority, a court will not hear the principal’s denials of agency to the prejudice of an innocent third party, who has been led to reasonably rely upon the agency and is harmed as a result".
From:
http://dictionary.law.com/definition2.asp ?selected =2411&bold=%7C%7C
Read the rest of this comment...
linux is contributed by all of the many millions of programmers around the world.
SCO doesnt have a chance stopping this, not even microsoft can do that.
SCO vs Linux is quite funnny because if SCO actually looked at the linux history they would
have to attack bsd and sysv to stop it.
I think those SCO people should go read the unix linux and opensource history
I hope SCO and its unix and linux is abandoned by the opensource community
Down with SCO... and they wonder why they get DoSd also....
DIE SCO, unixware, openserver, openlinux, caldera, i hope they just wither away.
************************************************
Boycott SCO products. Pride to Open-Source Communities.
F@CK SCO. Who the F@CK1ng H3ll do they think they are, IBM will fry your ass !
REd
SCO doesnt have a chance stopping this, not even microsoft can do that.
SCO vs Linux is quite funnny because if SCO actually looked at the linux history they would
have to attack bsd and sysv to stop it.
I think those SCO people should go read the unix linux and opensource history
I hope SCO and its unix and linux is abandoned by the opensource community
Down with SCO... and they wonder why they get DoSd also....
DIE SCO, unixware, openserver, openlinux, caldera, i hope they just wither away.
************************************************
Boycott SCO products. Pride to Open-Source Communities.
F@CK SCO. Who the F@CK1ng H3ll do they think they are, IBM will fry your ass !
REd
they're obviously in financial hot water, look at them, they've stooped so low tat they would wanna sue opensource (why not go after microsoft while you're at it? they steal code from everyone every day)
but it shows how financially weak they are if they gotta attack the little guy for small ammounts of money (small compared to what a large conglomerate makes yearly) they need money and publicity, so why not do what some washed up celebs do? sue for quick fortune and 15 minutes in the limelight?
that is exactly what SCO is trying to do IMO, attack IBM and little old opensource, look like king of the ring by attacking an ex-monopoly and picking on opensource developers.
they then will look like tough customers in the market and then they will be feared like microsoft... well that's what they hope for anyways, that or they're in bed with microsoft.
but it shows how financially weak they are if they gotta attack the little guy for small ammounts of money (small compared to what a large conglomerate makes yearly) they need money and publicity, so why not do what some washed up celebs do? sue for quick fortune and 15 minutes in the limelight?
that is exactly what SCO is trying to do IMO, attack IBM and little old opensource, look like king of the ring by attacking an ex-monopoly and picking on opensource developers.
they then will look like tough customers in the market and then they will be feared like microsoft... well that's what they hope for anyways, that or they're in bed with microsoft.
Bring it on.
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on May 15, 2003 12:10 PM#