Slashdot Mirror

SCO isn't a 'monster' who will demand more once they've devoured Linux. They're litigious bastards, but they know what they have their hooks sunk into.

Don't you mean Litigious Bastards?

Here's a link to where the internal corporate memo of false IP claims
is. I swear, just look at the title. Apparently they took it down. Maybe google has a cache of it. ;)

... might be to point out to congress how much SCO themselves have profited from the GPL and Open-Source-Software in the past, and how much value it adds to their products even now. The best example is probably gcc and other development tools for UnixWare, even SCO admits that gcc is the compiler of choice if you want portability.

... might be to point out to congress how much SCO themselves have profited from the GPL and Open-Source-Software in the past, and how much value it adds to their products even now. The best example is probably gcc and other development tools for UnixWare, even SCO admits that gcc is the compiler of choice if you want portability.

Yeah. Let's immortalize Darl by making him the first person to "land" (hee) on Mars. I mean, it's not like he's already immortalizing himself *cough*Litigious Bastards*cough. :)

Launching him *into the sun* might be a nice way to reward him for his tireless work, tho :) It'd also be a nice shortcut, as he's going to *fry in Hell* anyway....

SB

(Hint: read the top job)

Hey! Want a job? Just send an email to these guys, and ask about their cool new jobs!!

Heck, let's all send them emails!

I like litigious bastards.

Hey! Want a job? Just send an email to these guys, and ask about their cool new jobs!!

Heck, let's all send them emails!

I like litigious bastards.

Hey! Want a job? Just send an email to these guys, and ask about their cool new jobs!!

Heck, let's all send them emails!

I like litigious bastards.

> That's so last year. In 2004 it's "WMDRPA".

We're on Darl time here, where it's the early 80's, UNIX is still a proprietary monolith, "greed is good" is a morally acceptable values system and a white shirt, red tie and charcoal-grey jacket is a good look.

JPEG2000 hasn't been tested, validated and proven to work by leading technology companies such as Microsoft, The SCO Group, IBM and Ulteritec.

As a result, there's little compliance between several specifications and public is not buying anything that doesn't have the Microsoft seal of approval on it. As soon as the standard is supported by leading Internet Explorer and best-selling PhotoDraw imaging software package, you can expect JPEG2000 usage to boom.

The wireless question is simple. If your equipment is not secured and someone else uses it for their own activities (illegal or not), it is still your responsibility. If you haven't learned how to lock down your wireless router (and this goes for typical John and Jane Doe users as well) or had it locked down for you (by your ISP when they installed it), you get what you deserve. The whole ignorance thing does not work well in court or else certain companies would use that as an easy out (which they will still probably try).

Better, let them tear each other apart.

Incidentally, SCO's IP is 216.250.128.12
You can report file-sharers to the RIAA

What are we waiting for?

Interestingly, the only search engine that seems to know where to find litigious bastards is SCO's good friends Microsoft.

Oh, a sensitive one? You did know that dogs have been sent to space for suicide missions, didn't you? More than that, there are some
humans that many would like to see sent up there for just these kinds of missions.

"When asked why the media release which provided this information had not specifically told commercial Linux users - whom O'Shaughnessy said were SCO's target - to take out a licence or else face the consequences, ..." - from the SMH Article

The Australian Copyright Council advises people to be very careful when alleging copyright infringement, as it is easy to fall foul of defamation laws or section 202 of the copyright act.

"In some circumstances, letters claiming that someone has infringed copyright can result in problems under the law of defamation or under section 202 of the Copyright Act (which prohibits the making of groundless threats of legal proceedings). Therefore, it is advisable to have a letter of demand drafted by a lawyer." - Australian Copyright Council

Unfortunately Mr O'Shaughnessy may have blown it with his unvetted response to the SMH journalist (continuation of the first quote)

"... he said "in effect, this is what is being said." " - from the SMH Article

Oh come on, you can be more specific than that.

Google's "I'm feeling lucky" doesn't hit SCO, but a page documenting the Google bomb. We've been foiled :-(

Perhaps it's because they're a bunch of litigious bastards!

Remember, link link link!

Oh come on, you can do better than that.

(Click the link, you'll like it)

Here's one that IBM is waiting for...

SCO's stolen code in Linux

No wonder SCO is asking IBM to product their source code.

Now, now,
Novell's representations are hurting SCO's business and reputation. How can those litigious bastards be "the Evil Company That Will Sue Anyone at The Drop of A Hat," when Novell keeps saying that they don't have the rights to be "the Evil Company etc etc etc..."

Novell's false and misleading representations that it owns the UNIX and UnixWare copyrights has caused SCO irreparable harm to its copyrights, its business, and its reputation.

Yeah, right: SCO's pristine reputation is tarnished ... from THIS day forward? Those litigious bastards ...

you mean like pasting the contents of the linux header files that those litigious bastards claim ownership of?

Might as well tag this on: complaint_filing_jan_20_2004

Haven't opened it yet, but I see humor in the near future.

Darl, you should sue this company as well, they are using linux for their website !!! And this company too!

Let's hear it for the litigious bastards

And really, if that's not humour, what is. I imagine somewhere someone hacked the website just to kill that one page. That someone is a cool person, no matter what any of you think. They have my vote, at least.

I'm composing this all with links to the 404 in question simply because 99% of /.'ers are too lazy to follow links. Feel free to mod down for redundancy anyway.

And really, if that's not humour, what is. I imagine somewhere someone hacked the website just to kill that one page. That someone is a cool person, no matter what any of you think. They have my vote, at least.

I'm composing this all with links to the 404 in question simply because 99% of /.'ers are too lazy to follow links. Feel free to mod down for redundancy anyway.

Remember everybody, gotta link! litigious bastards.

As seen in this /. post

litigious bastards

Remember everybody, gotta link! litigious bastards.

As seen in this /. post

litigious bastards

Hi everybody,
I just figured I'd give a heads up to SCO's job opportunities page. If you'll notice the very first opening is for a Senior Software Engineer in India with the following job description:
Design and develop systems-level software for Linux and provide systems support by performing the following duties:...

I'm not making it up. Doesn't this sound really fishy/stupid?

Anyways, here's the link: http://ir.sco.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=1269 26

No, The SCO Group failed to understand the ramifications of the Asset Purchase Agreement that was signed between Novell and the Santa Cruz Operation, a separate company. Caldera bought the Operating Systems division of the latter, and then changed their name. Confusing the names is their First Line of Misdirection.

At SCO Countdown, I have a countdown to SCO's self imposed deadline for suing a Linux end user (I doubt that a Novell lawsuit can be counted as a end user suit), so remember, SCO has to file another lawsuit in 28 days or it misses it's deadline. In addition, after that litigious bastards campaign that was started on /. a few days ago, I acquired that domain and threw up a quick page.

Remember, link link link!

The title of the page will display whatever you put in the path name

Everyone knows SCO loves penguins.

As long as they don't do the baseless claims about Linux in Germany they can join whatever idiots that care to get close to them.

If there is any agroupation in Germany that takes the advice of these litigious bastards about intellectual property seriously, they deserver wahtever happens to their IP.

I am defining the contents of the variable SCO as the text litigious bastards.

Thanks for providing a link to The Supreme Court. Now I can visit its site to find out what it is. Good thing posters on on Slashdot privide hyperlinks to every page on the World Wide Web that they reference. Otherwise we'd all be confused idiots.

Well, there it is - my first rudely sarcastic post.

At the risk of being nationalist, I think that's actually a peculiarly American attitude, encouraged by your absurdly over-litigious society.
Let me start by saying that I am Russian and I've never been to the US. :) And while your comment about the American society certainly has merit, "Who is to blame?" is one of two fundamental questions in Russian culture. The second is, of course, "What shall we do now?" :)

Returning to the topic at hand, I think that blame should result not in a lawsuit, but in some actions to remedy the situation. The article you linked actually hints at a solution - the judges (the patent examiners) should raise their voice and complain to the society about litigious bastards (in our case, excessive patenters). Such problems cannot be solved within the system, we need to look from aside, identify and fix the weaknesses. Still, I am not sure there is enough rationality in today's world to solve such problems before they become really serious. :(

If they intend to introduce a new license product that will save their company shouldn't they at least update their web pages to mention it?

If they intend to introduce a new license product that will save their company shouldn't they at least update their web pages to mention it?

Frenchman 1: Uh c'est sco.
Frenchman 2: Quoi?
FM1: Les litigious bastards
FM2: Ohhhh...oui! sco.
FM1: Fetchez le vache!
FM2: Uhhh?
FM1: Fetchez le vache

Mooing noise. Cow is seen flying over wall of french castle. Sco's lawyers run away screaming "run away. run away".

I just care about these litigious bastards.

there's a better than even chance that Common Sense is also patented

Anyone that had it, demonstrably, and patented it would have enough of it to not sue for its use like those litigious bastards at SCO, or even the Nizzas.

[Cough...]

I've got a logo that NetBSD could use for free ... well, in a couple of months or so. Just change the 'S', 'C', and 'O' to a 'B', 'S', and a 'D'.

If people want religious, I don't think you can get much more religious than Utah, where (I hear) this logo comes from.

Of course, IBM has shown evidence that their contract does NOT say otherwise, but SCOldera seems to be hoping that the judge will overlook that tiny detail. :)

Except that's not quite right. The truly pathetic side to this story is that it isn't IBM that produced the evidence that the license doesn't say what SCO claims it does. It was SCO. That's right, they attached the side letter (as Exhibit C) establishing that IBM had rights to their own work to their original complaint. It's still right there on their website. Their own evidence debunks the main theory behind their case!

14. How can SCO expect me to purchase a license when its case with IBM hasn't been resolved yet? What if SCO loses its case against IBM? Will it reimburse Linux customers who purchased a SCO IP License for Linux?

Some Linux users have the misunderstanding that the SCO IP License for Linux hinges on the outcome of the SCO vs. IBM case. If that case were completely removed, Linux end users would still need to purchase a license from SCO to use the SCO IP found in Linux. The IBM case surrounds mis-use of derivative works of SCO UNIX. It does not change the fact that line-by-line SCO IP code is found in Linux.