Slashdot Mirror

Yeah, Its a bit of a standard plug tour. Though he didn't say anything particularly contraversial in this article, unlike in the one he did for computerworld, with its "if linux gets too commercial the developpers will throw their toys out of the pram and do a Cartman"

This online poll currently has a small but worrying percentage of people ready to buy SCO licences.

read the end of this article. You are like totally famous now. 3>

it's a very good hoax

If you notice, one of the links is googles cached copy. Or perhaps your suggesting Google uses IE for it's spider?

"To the tune of US$1.6 billion in fiscal year 2003, Microsoft bled money from its Business Solutions, Mobile and Embedded Devices, MSN, and Home and Entertainment divisions."

"The Mobile and Embedded device division remains Microsoft's smallest business unit after historic failures such as the collapse of a $5 billion deal with AT&T Corp. Despite years of development and some success in Europe, October was the first time a Windows Smartphone was introduced in North America."

According to Computer World the bill was approved today.

I can see it now...

We've got an archive full of documents and emails sent from the PM about Dr David Kelly, they're right here.

Oops - anybody got a working Windows RMS hooked up?

I offered this article about how the Navy/Marine network was brought down by the recent spat of worms the other day but was rejected.

There are a number of other articles our there that give info on this and the reports of other nuke plants being affected on the fateful day last Thursday.

A comparison between SuSE Linux Enterprise Server 8 with UnixWare 7.1.3 revealed some suspicious similarities between the two, particularly, but not only, between many new drivers which suddenly appeared in the SCO's closed-source Unixware, but previously existed in SuSE Linux.

SCO recently licensed several hundred drivers to Sun. Nobody knows for sure, but could they be the same ones?

While it might be premature to allege copying without access to Unixware source code, the investigators do say "I feel these issues need to be investigated further."

A comparison between SuSE Linux Enterprise Server 8 with UnixWare 7.1.3 revealed some suspicious similarities between the two, particularly, but not only, between many new drivers which suddenly appeared in the SCO's closed-source Unixware, but previously existed in SuSE Linux.

SCO recently licensed several hundred drivers to Sun. Nobody knows for sure, but could they be the same ones?

While it might be premature to allege copying without access to Unixware source code, the investigators do say "I feel these issues need to be investigated further."

I can see how you (kylef, thebatlab et al.) would misread and misunderstand the post, but if you bothered to read the articles - the IDG article in particular - you would plainly see they are the sources of the quoted sections.

Choose your edition.

It seems that you're the only one here putting words in someone's mouth.

"Taylor says he plans to focus on (and fund) studies that 'will highlight Microsoft's advantages in areas such as security, feature-completeness and total cost of ownership.'"

You mean like this one, this one, or this one How about this one?

I am not a lawyer, and neither are most Slashdot posters, so you're probably on a hiding to nowhere if you really expect to get advice on a legal matter here...

Before I start, they haven't even started offering Unixware for Linux licenses yet - so why are you considering taking precipitate action. At the very least wait until they offer it! (and no I'm not advising you necessarily take it when they do)

At least one lawyer seems to think you should not contact SCO, but maybe that's just Australia!

A couple of other points have been raised from time to time:

1. If you download Linux from ftp.sco.com (or get a CD), then you are getting from SCO under a GPL license. Some might say it's the end of the story, but even if it's not... SCO supplied it to you under a GPL license which they claim to have rescinded or not accepted (even while distributing it) - what is to stop them also rescinding or saying that they don't accept (in future) whatever new license terms you get their stuff under? They've done it once (GPL), how do you know they won't do it again (Unixware license for Linux)

2. If you get Linux under some SCO license, you might be violating the GPL license of all the other kernel contributors (including individuals and large companies). If SCO gets destroyed, or even if not, as a result of this law suit, these people/entities could allege you broke their license, and sue you.... and I think yes they will find out who you are if they really want to, even if you SCO deal is confidential. The route they would take would (a) sue SCO, (b) get the list of SCO Unixware for Linux licensees from SCO through (a), (c) sue the Unixware for Linux licensees.

Unix is dying

"Today we slammed the door shut on (this copyright question) and threw away the key once and for all, so this issue doesn't come up again," said Darl McBride, SCO's president and chief executive officer, in an interview.

has anyone else seen this?

Looks like novel chickened out
Here's the link

Does anyone know what to make of this? Does it bolster SCO's case? Those documents that the paralegal 'found' couldn't be forged, right?

You laugh, but you'll laugh even harder with this article basicly saying email is the no1 threat for australian companies.

This shows how rigid they are in their thinking. I mean, if people used propper policies and security protection, there was no need for the digital witch-hunt they are now proclaiming.

Now I don't agree with the way things are now, for instance I don't think security firms SHOULD exist, but this kind of artisanal malpractice where the trade itself corrupts and starts to sustain itself, is present in all sorts of professions. You see it in law, you can see it in the medical department of hospitals, you can see it in university research labs looking for ever more funding, and you have it in the IT world. I think this is where the real issue is.

The abuse in the profession leads to a perverse effect of self sustainability, which is ofcourse exploited without any regulatory force, usually because the knowledge in the field is a barrier on itself, preventing people to get in, unless they comply to the practices of the trade, after which they are absorbed in the system, which will take good care of them.

That's a little abstract, but to give an example, if there weren't any people hacking and cracking, there would not be a need for security. But companies are about money, and are ths subject to hacking/cracking/virus/worms etc, giving existance to security companies. And who works for these companies ? Presto, there's your self-sustainability.

And no I'm not an anticapitalist or communist, or in security or cracking or hacking or law or medicine myself, these issues have been roaming my overly concerned mind for quite some time. Considering my signal to noise ratio, this post probalby won't mean much either way..

ah well..