Slashdot Mirror

No. 1 is EV1Servers.net who announced SCO lied about how much they were paid (Microsoft is a fan of EV1)
(little did the CEO know when he made the deal that SCO planned to 'worth' him out of seven figures)

No. 2 is CompterAssociates who announced SCO lied about "linux licenses" which are really from an unrelated settlement

No. 3 is Leggett and Platt who shockingly is running Microsoft-IIS/5.0 on Windows 2000

No. 4 is Questar Gas who just wanted to get things over with and also runs Apache/1.3.26 (Unix) on Windows 2000


Make sure *you* are Legally Unencumbered(tm) by getting a SCOsores license
and don't forget to head over and sign your Clean Slate contract with the RIAA

Hmm. Let's test that theory, shall we? Send some letters to SCO saying "Stop your barratry or I'll send more pics!" For bonus points, send them hello.jpg (of goatse fame) to see if that speeds things up.

Of course, the test may be aborted due to SCO going out of business soon, but... well, this is as close to a legitimate use of that dreadful image as I can think of...

The SCO Group
355 South 520 West
Suite 100
Lindon, Utah 84042 USA
801-765-4999 phone
801-765-1313 fax

Contact SCO online
Darl C McBride
1799 Vintage Oak Ln
Salt Lake City, UT 84121-6539

Darl's home phone #: (801)424-2006
Darl's office phone #: 801-932-5820
Email Darl darl@sco.com

Disclaimer:

Please use the above information responsibly. Granted, it's only a couple minutes of using Google & sco.com to find this, but... Note that I got the phone number above from the old Slashdot post thereof (the one where he complained of folks harassing him or somesuch) so it is real, but it could theoretically have been changed since then. I have no idea.

Please note that the use of the word "barratry" above does not imply that SCO or its executives have (yet) been convicted of any such charge, it merely expresses my oppinion that they are irrationally litigious. By reading this, copying this, or attaching this to any legal filing, you agree not to sue me, ever, for any reason, including but not limited to your own feelings of inadequacy. Stripping the copyright information below, whether or not it ever existed or could ever be meaningful is a tort under an absurd provision of the DMCA.

(C) 2004, Anonymous Coward

The EV1 deal is interesting.

SCO is claiming the deal with EV1 was worth more than a million dollars. EV1 is disputing the 7 figures and the confusion seems to be the weasel word "worth".

In other words, SCO is claiming that $1million+ "worth" of licenses were sold. So that's $1mill/$699 = 1400+ licenses, or $1mill/$1399 = 700+ licenses. SCO's own quarterly says only $20k income from licensing this quarter. It's possible the EV1 payments are in stages, or won't appear on SCO's financials until next quarter, but it's also possible that EV1 only paid $20k for their licenses.

But SCO is spinning this to sound much more impressive. EV1 was the patsy here; they thought they were getting a great deal, but they were just another pawn in SCO's (Microsoft's?) smear campaign against Linux.

Actually, that someone would have to beat of customers with a stick! The formula that started Coca-Cola contained cocaine (the coca in the name) which has since been replaced with caffeine.

(This reply is on topic 'cause everyone knows that Darl, of The Scum Group, smokes crack.)

Beautiful! Now all we need is somewhere to post the information! I guess we could tell SCO themselves, but I'd rather tell someone else like IBM! I can just imagine SCO telling the court "and on the 3rd and 4th March 2004 we distributed linux kernel source 2.4.21 for sco linux under the gpl to 20,000 anonymous users from our public web server".

Lawsuit
SCO has finally decided who they are going to file suit against.

Cheers

Z

I cannot. My browser warns:

- The server's name "www.thescogroup.com" does not match the certificate's name "www.sco.com".
Somebody may be trying to eavesdrop on you.

I do not take my browser warnings lightly. It again looks like SCO is a lousy incompetent company.

It looks like their next lawsuit is against DaimlerChrysler. Check out http://ir.sco.com.

To save you from a soon to be slash'd registration page (they don't need anymore fake emails)

SCO Group First Quarter 2004 Webcast and Conference Call (Wed, March 3 - 9am MT)
Windows Media Player
Real Player

To save you from a soon to be slash'd registration page (they don't need anymore fake emails)

SCO Group First Quarter 2004 Webcast and Conference Call (Wed, March 3 - 9am MT)
Windows Media Player
Real Player

That's a laugh. Can I mod the article +1 Funny?

I still think someone should drop Darl a line and suggest suing Canopy Group. The press release could read something like, "Since we've already shot ourselves in one foot trying to sue IBM we've decided to shoot ourself in the other foot by suing our parent company." I'll even copyleft this post so they can use it to make the announcement. This should save them that extra time they claim to need.

Here's how end users can avoid being sued. They can buy a license from SCO to use the linux kernel. I hope somebody launches a countersuit or something.

Added URL: Adding insult to injury, SCO is making Linux licenses available for purchase by end users who are using other Linux distributions. It would be beautiful if someone launched a countersuit for this absurd manipulation of legal uncertainty.

Me thinks they're probably having trouble with their random number generator in Unixware. Why doesn't someone drop Darl a line and suggest he try Linux. While you're at it maybe you could suggest that they sue Canopy Group. You could mention that they're the parent company that owns Caldera and that they're currently anticipating a $5 billion dollar influx from IBM. Since Darl is obviously looking for a big fish maybe he'll try this one.

Denial of Service Attack against 911??? Maybe 911 should change their phone number just like SCO changd their DNS name to http://www.thescogroup.com/.

HOLY CRAP! From the SCO Website!

Feb 27, 2004

For immediate release:

SCO Group of Linden, Utah announced the first end-user lawsuit designed to further their SCOSource program to get people to properly license SCO IP currently being distributed in Linux. SCO has filed suit against the owners of insecure.org who, according to Netcraft, are running Apache/Linux.

Asked for comment, SCO Group CEO Darl McBride responded: "It is a terrible day when IP owners have to resort to a lawsuit to protect their valuable IP interests. insecure.org had months to do the right thing and respect SCO IP by signing up for our SCOSource program, but they blatantly ignored our generous offer. It appears that the only option left open to us is to take our case to the courts where we will ultimately prevail. So, it is with great sadness and regret that the SCO Group announces this lawsuit, because we don't do business this way. It just goes to show you how far these IP terrorists will go to destroy the valuable creations of hard-working Americans. Nobody likes a lawsuit, but we have a right and a duty to protect ourselves and the Constitution of the United States from the evil axis of IP destruction that is the Open Source community."

I'm sure we could come up with a more comprehensive list if we look hard enough

http://linuxupdate.sco.com/scolinux/ has their full distro for download.

(Blank credentials work fine in the authentication dialog: just click OK).

The thing with SCOX is they say one thing and do quite another. Tricky and Litigous Bastards.

Last I checked, the Samba website had a diatribe against SCO with a "we have the TrueSpiritOfOpenSource(TM) and we won't stop even litigious bastards like SCO from distributing our software" statement. Meaning, Samba is playing the moral high ground while SCO's fighting dirty.

How about Linux admitting where the millions of lines for 2.4 kernel came from?

You mean it's pretty similar to what I'm trying to do with litigious bastards ?

And I don't know if litigious bastards shows the litigious bastards yet.

And I don't know if litigious bastards shows the litigious bastards yet.

I remember the attempted bunch of assholes bomb...good times, funny stuff.

Hrm, I just installed this, and I'm anxious to try it out.
I'll just post my email address here, and wait a few minutes...

Or litigatious bastards ...

I was just thinking, wouldn't it be tragic if 100,000 signups occurred but they were all random data filled in by an automated testing bot.

Where do I sign up? The host shop.sco.com (linked from How to purchase and activate a SCO IP License website) is up and running, but with port 80 closed! What is going on? See:

pth@sd:~$ nmap -vp80 shop.sco.com

Starting nmap V. 2.54BETA31 ( www.insecure.org/nmap/ )
No tcp,udp, or ICMP scantype specified, assuming vanilla tcp connect() scan. Use -sP if you really don't want to portscan (and just want to see what hosts are up).
Warning: You are not root -- using TCP pingscan rather than ICMP
Host shop.sco.com (216.250.128.240) appears to be up ... good.
Initiating Connect() Scan against shop.sco.com (216.250.128.240)
The Connect() Scan took 0 seconds to scan 1 ports.
The 1 scanned port on shop.sco.com (216.250.128.240) is: closed

Nmap run completed -- 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 2 seconds
pth@sd:~$

Is that another desperate PR stunt? I would like to buy a license, to sue them in the future for selling it to me. My lawyer adviced me that it would be a better investment than SCO stock, especially in the case of class action lawsuit. Does anyone has any comments about their EULA? Is it legally binding? If so, then would it be enforceable? And the most important question: Where do I sign up? Thanks.

The page on the SCO site selling the IP licenses alreay seems to be slasdotted. Slashdot, buckle up for a lawsuit.

That's currently in beta but word on the street is that "I'm Feeling Lucky" for e-mail will send five hundred e-mails to the CEO of any company that tries to sue google!

I'm sure darl_mcbride@sco.com of some litigious bastards will be thrilled to finally have some friends. Because of course we all know the more email you get, the more friends you MUST have ;)

Crappits. We've caused another SCO DDoS. And this time it was our fault. :)

shop website
shop website

It feels good, try it!

shop website

Crappits. We've caused another SCO DDoS. And this time it was our fault. :)

shop website
shop website

It feels good, try it!

shop website

Crappits. We've caused another SCO DDoS. And this time it was our fault. :)

shop website
shop website

It feels good, try it!

shop website

Now we can update our links to read:
litigious greedy bastards

Their web store, where you have to go to buy the "license" or even find out how much it costs, is heavily slashdotted already. Get ready for Darl to claim, "Interest in the Linux licensing program has been huge! We've had 438 billion inquiries in the last 3 days!"

We could all switch to SCO OpenServer. They recently released service pack 2, a "a key milestone in the OpenServer development roadmap" which allows you to "easily connect to many USB-compatible devices."

Breathtaking stuff.

I wonder if their "pattern matching experts" will start finding OpenServer code in Linux usb.h now?

Looks like we took their shop website down.

That's their shop website.

Did you get that? Their shop website.

All those links are different btw. Really. Just like this shop website. They all need clicking on.

Looks like we took their shop website down.

That's their shop website.

Did you get that? Their shop website.

All those links are different btw. Really. Just like this shop website. They all need clicking on.

Looks like we took their shop website down.

That's their shop website.

Did you get that? Their shop website.

All those links are different btw. Really. Just like this shop website. They all need clicking on.

Looks like we took their shop website down.

That's their shop website.

Did you get that? Their shop website.

All those links are different btw. Really. Just like this shop website. They all need clicking on.

SCO Linux is/was their Linux distri.

The Linux license is a protection from being sued.
It can now be bougth online here.

However, I do think the old Mac OS was crap. And it was a fusion of NeXT and *BSD unixes that created the core of OS X.

I'll calmly ignore the Linux remark. But my roommate's seven year old daughter hasn't had any problems with my Debian box. And debian is solid, flexible, powerful... well, it was more solid before I upgraded to testing.

The only upside I see to OS X is that Mac users aren't being subjected to frivolous litigation by a nervous company.

NOTICE: SCO has suspended new sales and distribution of SCO Linux until the intellectual property issues surrounding Linux are resolved. SCO will, however, continue to support existing SCO Linux and Caldera OpenLinux customers consistent with existing contractual obligations. SCO offers at no extra charge to its existing Linux customers a SCO UNIX IP license for their use of prior SCO or Caldera distributions of Linux in binary format. The license also covers binary use of support updates distributed to them by SCO. This SCO license balances SCO's need to enforce its intellectual property rights against the practical needs of existing customers in the marketplace.

For further information on how to obtain RPMS/SRPMS for OpenLinux, eDesktop and eServer see:

www.sco.com/support/linux_info.html

For further information on how to obtain RPMS/SRPMS for SCO Linux 4.0 see:

www.sco.com/support/scolinux_info.html or the SCO Linux 4.0 Update Download Page.

From: www.thescogroup.com/support/download.html

NOTICE: SCO has suspended new sales and distribution of SCO Linux until the intellectual property issues surrounding Linux are resolved. SCO will, however, continue to support existing SCO Linux and Caldera OpenLinux customers consistent with existing contractual obligations. SCO offers at no extra charge to its existing Linux customers a SCO UNIX IP license for their use of prior SCO or Caldera distributions of Linux in binary format. The license also covers binary use of support updates distributed to them by SCO. This SCO license balances SCO's need to enforce its intellectual property rights against the practical needs of existing customers in the marketplace.

For further information on how to obtain RPMS/SRPMS for OpenLinux, eDesktop and eServer see:

www.sco.com/support/linux_info.html

For further information on how to obtain RPMS/SRPMS for SCO Linux 4.0 see:

www.sco.com/support/scolinux_info.html or the SCO Linux 4.0 Update Download Page.

From: www.thescogroup.com/support/download.html

But they are selling! Their website has an online shop where you can buy those licences. You have to give your credit card number:

SCO Online Shop

there website has to be online before they sell anything ;)

I give up. I can't tell the litigious bastards without a scorecard anymore.

Okay, someone clue me in. Which litigious bastards are we supposed to be angry at now?

These litigious bastards ...
these other litigious bastards...
now these litigious bastards ...
or perhaps (and oldie but a goodie) these litigious bastards

Man, that's going to be an awful lot of HREFs to compile in my posts to talk about anybody on Slashdot anymore.

It would have been so much better if that were:

If this is the way that Open Source treats its friends, I'd hate to see how it treats its enemies, the litigious bastards...

It would have been so much better if that were:

If this is the way that Open Source treats its friends, I'd hate to see how it treats its enemies, the litigious bastards...

The most offensive, yet funny, thing that Linus said was that SCO was smoking crack.