Slashdot Mirror
Domain: sco.com
Stories and comments across the archive that link to sco.com.
Comments · 1,936
-
You know what?
In order to get a SCUBA tank filled with compressed air you have to flash certification credentials saying that you've the knowledge to use it without killing yourself.
I have dived w/o a lisance for a while now. Yeah, thats right, 70 feet down and I never had one lesson.
I was with a divemaster and other ppl who had gone though all the yada yada bs that you had to do to get your Padi lisance but I never did. And you know what? It really was not that hard.
Oh no! You say that I could have killed myself! Well damn skippy pal. You can kill youself every day by doing any number of things that don't require some sort of bs lisance, and really in much easier ways. Oh, how did I convicnce the divemaster that I was lisanced? Simple, I lied. I told him that I had one, told him however that I was a bit rusty and that if he could give me a quick refresher course that it would be all good. Then I was good to go.
That 1st set of dives was kind of rough yeah, I was learning fast and getting used to operating some equipment that I had never used before but in all reality it was not that hard. To say that you have to have a lisance to do that imo is a load of crap.
However, I am well aware that this planet is populated with a bunch of people that are fscking clueless. If they had tried to do what I did they might have ended up dead or mamed or some bs that would have caused much grief for not only themselfs but everyone that they were involved with. And so we, thanks to the general stupidity of humainity, have to have these lisances on what we consideder dangerous.
So, back to the point. Is being online w/o a lisance of having a clue dangerious? In my, even though I'm posting this as a AC I am no computer/inet noob, opinion hell no. Can you cause harm/be harmed on this open internet invention that was created upon the ideas of free speech and trust, well yeah kind of. But is the level of harm such that we have to have listancing requirements? Can you unplug your computer from the internet and still have a working machine? Of course. Can you install a better browser, or hell maybe I don't know have the powers that be enforce some anti-trust laws to prevent obvious monopolys that crank out rev after rev of software that sucks, charges you for it, and even then gets slimeballs to attack the next best thing?
Ok, I'm going to stop ranting now because I think I've made my point. It's just kind of annoying to have to pay for everyone elses ignorance/stupidity every day of your life and then watch some moron who proably knows even less about computers and life in general (even though they may even be friggen older than me) start screaming that *I* need to be lisanced to do what I've been doing for years just because they are too lazy to get a fscking clue. -
You go, boy!
-
Horrid little rag...
Anything published in that rag should be highly suspect and taken with a grain of salt. The only thing worse than the G&M is perhaps the enquirer.
btw, I hear that the next edition of the enquirer features Darl Mcbride on the front page and something about his addiction to crack! -
Torvalds > McBride.Linus is such a stud. *swoon*
By the way, it seems from SCOs website that they want to grow our business.
"They want to grow our business?!"
"Quick, DDoS them!"Letter about the whole recent DDoS is here Open letter to open source community. Hum.
-
Re:Childish screening procedures.
Well, now that there's a new item for Open Letters, here's the extensively revised version of the one I posted a couple days ago. You can also see it on my journal page.
A Linux User's Open Response to Darl McBride's Open Letter to the Open Source Community
By John Gabriel, NYC, 9/11/03
"What comes of litigation? Poverty and degradation to any community that will encourage it. Will it build cities, open farms, build railroads, erect telegraph lines and improve a country? It will not; but it will bring any community to ruin." -- Brigham Young, JD 11:259.
"Contracts are what you use against those with whom you have relationships." -- Darl McBride
Dear Mr. McBride,
First, let me introduce myself. My name is John Gabriel. I have been working in the technical field for 15 years, as a Network Administrator, Applications Manager, Network Manager, Sr. Networking Engineer, and now, Freelance Consultant. And, yes, I'm an MCSE.
My first experiences with Unix occurred in the late 1970's, during school field trips to local colleges. I also did Unix technical support for students while taking a class in Pascal in the late 1980's. My first experience with Linux dates to 1994, when I downloaded whatever Linux kernel was available at that time.
While I did install it successfully, on a Compaq Deskpro 386/25, I quickly abandoned it as the Deskpro didn't have enough memory to support the X Windows System. Several years later, in 1998, I became a Caldera customer, with a purchase of Caldera OpenLinux Base ver. 1.22, with Linux kernel 2.0.33. I ran into similar problems once more.
About a year ago, I again became interested in Linux, and now run Linux on my home workstation in a dual-boot configuration with Windows XP.
About 4-5 months ago, I began following the SCO v. IBM story. I was at first inclined to be open-minded towards SCO's claims. It wouldn't be the first time a small company has had its copyrights violated by a larger vendor, though the violator is usually, in my experience, Microsoft, as exemplified by Caldera's history with DR-DOS.
However, the more I researched the story and SCO's claims, the more convinced I became that SCO's claims were, well, baseless. Being the type that usually likes to "root for the underdog", I was surprised by my conclusions.
Anyway, that's enough introduction. What follows is an Open Response to your Open Letter to the Open Source Community. I grant everyone, including you, permission to re-publish it, or quote from it, without restriction, except that my comments be properly attributed to myself. Consider it under a "BSD-style" license if you like.
Open Letter to the Open Source Community
By Darl McBride, CEO, The SCO Group
1) The most controversial issue in the information technology industry today is the ongoing battle over software copyrights and intellectual property. This battle is being fought largely between vendors who create and sell proprietary software, and the Open Source community. My company, the SCO Group, became a focus of this controversy when we filed a lawsuit against IBM alleging that SCO's proprietary Unix code has been illegally copied into the free Linux operating system. In doing this we angered some in the Open Source community by pointing out obvious intellectual property problems that exist in the current Linux software development model.Response to Paragraph 1 of your "Open Letter":
This is very difficult to respond to, because your analysis of the issues and of the reasons for the Open Source community's anger is, in the words of the great physicist Wolfgang Pauli, "so bad it's not even wrong."
For instance, your own lawsuit against IBM does not allege that "SCO's proprietary Unix code has been illegally copied into L -
Re:Childish screening procedures.
Well, now that there's a new item for Open Letters, here's the extensively revised version of the one I posted a couple days ago. You can also see it on my journal page.
A Linux User's Open Response to Darl McBride's Open Letter to the Open Source Community
By John Gabriel, NYC, 9/11/03
"What comes of litigation? Poverty and degradation to any community that will encourage it. Will it build cities, open farms, build railroads, erect telegraph lines and improve a country? It will not; but it will bring any community to ruin." -- Brigham Young, JD 11:259.
"Contracts are what you use against those with whom you have relationships." -- Darl McBride
Dear Mr. McBride,
First, let me introduce myself. My name is John Gabriel. I have been working in the technical field for 15 years, as a Network Administrator, Applications Manager, Network Manager, Sr. Networking Engineer, and now, Freelance Consultant. And, yes, I'm an MCSE.
My first experiences with Unix occurred in the late 1970's, during school field trips to local colleges. I also did Unix technical support for students while taking a class in Pascal in the late 1980's. My first experience with Linux dates to 1994, when I downloaded whatever Linux kernel was available at that time.
While I did install it successfully, on a Compaq Deskpro 386/25, I quickly abandoned it as the Deskpro didn't have enough memory to support the X Windows System. Several years later, in 1998, I became a Caldera customer, with a purchase of Caldera OpenLinux Base ver. 1.22, with Linux kernel 2.0.33. I ran into similar problems once more.
About a year ago, I again became interested in Linux, and now run Linux on my home workstation in a dual-boot configuration with Windows XP.
About 4-5 months ago, I began following the SCO v. IBM story. I was at first inclined to be open-minded towards SCO's claims. It wouldn't be the first time a small company has had its copyrights violated by a larger vendor, though the violator is usually, in my experience, Microsoft, as exemplified by Caldera's history with DR-DOS.
However, the more I researched the story and SCO's claims, the more convinced I became that SCO's claims were, well, baseless. Being the type that usually likes to "root for the underdog", I was surprised by my conclusions.
Anyway, that's enough introduction. What follows is an Open Response to your Open Letter to the Open Source Community. I grant everyone, including you, permission to re-publish it, or quote from it, without restriction, except that my comments be properly attributed to myself. Consider it under a "BSD-style" license if you like.
Open Letter to the Open Source Community
By Darl McBride, CEO, The SCO Group
1) The most controversial issue in the information technology industry today is the ongoing battle over software copyrights and intellectual property. This battle is being fought largely between vendors who create and sell proprietary software, and the Open Source community. My company, the SCO Group, became a focus of this controversy when we filed a lawsuit against IBM alleging that SCO's proprietary Unix code has been illegally copied into the free Linux operating system. In doing this we angered some in the Open Source community by pointing out obvious intellectual property problems that exist in the current Linux software development model.Response to Paragraph 1 of your "Open Letter":
This is very difficult to respond to, because your analysis of the issues and of the reasons for the Open Source community's anger is, in the words of the great physicist Wolfgang Pauli, "so bad it's not even wrong."
For instance, your own lawsuit against IBM does not allege that "SCO's proprietary Unix code has been illegally copied into L -
What is suspicious behavior?
I'll tell you what suspicious behavior is... When a terrorist overlord has factions in 82 countries wages a campaign of shock and awwwww upon a target demographic....
The squeaky wheels of justice need greasing...
-B -
the MOST annoying bug...
What is your favorite computer bug story?
Still naging around, can someone please sqeeze it? -
Damn are SCO reading my slashdot posts?
Here is something very interesting for you SCO followers. It's interesting to note that SCO have annotated the unix family tree that I posted here.
You can see their L33t photoshop work here
Whats interesting is they claim they "own" Unics,
that UNIX TSS is the parent to OpenServer and that SCO Linux is older than original Linux!For a start i wouldnt say the levenez tree is anything near an official unix family tree, more of a best estimate in some cases. I wonder if they got permission from him to use it?
pass me the crack pipe!
-
Slashdot SCO insteadMaybe instead of slashdotting poor LinuxWorld we could make SCO pay for the bandwidth?
Here's the Open Letter to the Open Source Community.
-
It's been changed.
Atleast on SCO's site it has... click click for the chick!
-
Re:Apparently they keep an eye on /.
Looks like SCO (or maybe Center 7) is just pulling its images from other sites. Wouldn't it be great if SCO got sued by Corbis of one of the other photo banks for stealing their intellectual property? Irony, thy name is SCO.
BTW, here is a quote from Novell's legal page:
"Design/Layout
The design or layout of the Novell.com website or any other Novell owned, operated, licensed or controlled site is the property of Novell, Inc. Elements of Novell websites are protected by copyright, trade dress and other laws and may not be copied or imitated in whole or in part. No logo, graphic, sound or image from any Novell website may be copied or retransmitted unless expressly permitted by Novell. Please report any such instances of use to permission@novell.com."
If anyone at Novell is reading this, PLEASE direct notice of this violation of your image to your legal department. I honestly find it hard to believe that anyone at Novell would give SCO permission to use *anything* Novell is in a position to deny.
-
Re:No "speculation" needed
Funny how SCO changed the picture on this page. Would it that they're reading Slashdot?!
-
Re:No "speculation" needed
Whoever modded this offtopic must have missed the IRIX logo on this SCO IP.
-
Re:no Red Hat
Worse than that, they fired him once they saw that he'd gotten positive press on Slashdot and replaced him with a Fembot
-
SCO changed the photo...
That guy is no longer in the SCO page
That can only mean...
Let's greet them:
- I myself would like to show all my support to you in the case you're committing ritual suicide soon. Have a nice day! -
SCO and Plesk?
This is probably way off-topic, but anyway. Check the photo on the SCO website again (http://www.sco.com/products/authentication/) and then go to http://www.plesk.com/Product/index.php I think this guy is in a lot of trouble, given the fact that plesk only runs on linux and fbsd
-
wrapup: 5 urls so far
-
god..
this guy really is everywhere
-
Violet laser beams...
... stabbed out of the DarlBot's unhealthy bloodshot eyes, scorching a black line across the very pixels of the JPG until the RedHat was just a blackened, charred area.
-
Time for another fine in Germany
Stowell added: "Sooner or later the invoicing will reach European companies I'm sure. We will not be limiting this to a US only market."
This warning seems to be a clear breach of the German injunction.
For that matter, so is the material on SCO's main web page here, which makes the unproven allegation "customers unknowingly received illegal copies of SCO property", among other things. I can't think of any reason why the injunction would be limited to material on the German-language page, which is, after all, also served from the U.S. -
Well what do you expect from proprietary software?Many Unix geeks, particularly on Slashdot, have praised Apple's decision to base Mac OS X off of the enterprise-ready BSD codebase. However, it seems that most have never actually taken a closer look at this OS. If they had, a closer inspection would reveal that Apple's philosophy toward *nix and Linux compatibility has been one of "embrace and extend", and this is meant in the M$ sense. Wherever possible, Apple has engineered their operating system to be incompatible with industry standards. Simply put, Mac OS X is a nonstandard, bastardized Unix that bears about as much resemblance to the real thing as does, say, Windows ME.
Let's start with the windowing environment, since that is the first thing users will notice. While both KDE and GNOME are mature, stable, and accepted as IEEE standards, Apple has elected to use neither. In fact, they don't even use X at all! Their display system is a proprietary, closed-source system called Quartz Extreme. In addition to the moral issues involved with closed software, this precludes the user from running X apps. There is an untested and alpha-quality X11 emulation layer available for download, but it is emulation, so programs will be slow. Does this sound like a standards-based system to you?
Looking under the hood, it gets worse. While all other *nixes use standard ELF binaries, Darwin (Apple's name for their proprietary "Unix" kernel) does not. It uses Mach-O, an unproven format that is proprietary to Apple. The moribund FreeBSD, off which OS X is based, uses ELF, so clearly Apple went to the extra effort of "switching" (heh) simply to break compatibility. With ELF, users would be able to run most of their Lunix apps; with Mach-O this is impossible. Additionally, Apple has moved most configuration info fromhuman readable text files into a proprietary database called "NetInfo", which is much like the Windows registry we all loathe. Why? These are only a few of the ways that Apple has deliberately broken compatibility with other systems, presumably in order to lock users in to expensive Mac hardware.
When we factor in the threat to users' civil liberties that is posed by the DRM included to support the iTunes Music Store (do you really think it will end there?) it is obvious that real *nix gurus should give OS X a wide berth. Caveat emptor.
-
Inform SCO's business partners
You might want to send some information to SCO's business partners and ask them what they think about all this.
SCO currently provides detailed lists of such business partners: http://www.sco.de/partner/index.html and http://wdb1.sco.com/sdir_web/owa/ptrLocator.searc
h It might be a good idea to copy or mirror the information available there - SCO can withdraw that information at any time...
Expect SCO's lawyers to react with threatening legal mails if you contact their business partners.
Important: Do not be rude! Some of these companies do not like what SCO is doing.
-
ObSCOJoke
Making money out of open source software is so simple:
- Pick a project
- Claim that it contains your intellectual property
- Give a PPT presentation in Greek
- ???
- Profit!
-
Inform SCO's business partnersYou might want to send some information to SCO's business partners and ask them what they think about all this.
SCO currently provides detailed lists of such business partners: http://www.sco.de/partner/index.html and http://wdb1.sco.com/sdir_web/owa/ptrLocator.searc
h It might be a good idea to copy or mirror the information available there - SCO can withdraw that information at any time...
Expect SCO's lawyers to react with threatening legal mails if you contact their business partners.
Important: Do not be rude! Some of these companies do not like what SCO is doing.
-
Re:Just https
And which they continue to "forget"....
-
Re:Wrong species....
I believe you are refering to this unique species.
-
Re:Suing SCO in small claims court?
Have a look at http://www.sco.com/ibmlawsuit. Look at the exhibits, starting with Exhibit A. The Exhibits include contracts between IBM and SCO. SCO is suing IBM because SCO claims IBM broke those contracts. You will also see, if you READ the lawsuit, that there is NOTHING BUT contract violations in the claims. There are NO copyright infringement claims in the lawsuit.
Do you have any contracts with SCO? No contract means no lawsuit for contract violation. It's that simple. -
Self-generated protest?
I wonder if SCO is joining the protest, their website seems to be down lately a lot too!
It's up right now. Perhaps if enough slashdotters could visit them and help them protest a bit more? -
But what happened with AIX?
As far as I recall, The original SCO complaint revoked IBMs license to use and distribute AIX as well (before aiming at Linux also). What has happened since then? SCO
filed for an injunction, are they close to getting it? Having worked in the ATC industry I know of atleast two countries who use AIX for their main Air traffic control systems.
I can see several governments being rather "annoyed" if SCO actually managed to succeed in their injunction against IBM and AIX.
If SCO actually did manage to revoke AIX, that would mean a large european country and most of the US's Airspace going down. nice one.
Just to help with their web servers load right now (ahem) this is the original AIX complaint
-
Good Job
I knew we could do it if we put http://www.sco.com/ as start page!
-
Re:A hyperlink for the lazy
seemed ok, but i reloaded it a few times just to be sure.
-
A hyperlink for the lazy
-
Re:Low bandwith DOSing?
-
Re:You would think...
Sound like anybody else we know?
-
How did you miss this...Now, with all of the SCO watching/bashing we have been doing, how is it that we so far have missed out on bashing SCO for claiming ownership of SAMBA? (see SCO Announces Release of SCO Authentication 2.1 for Microsoft Active Directory )
I mean, this HAS to be good for at least a few good digs at SCO's expence...
-
Hi
I would like to pointout another bold face lie from the Internet Week article: Chrish "Douche bag" Sontag: "t requires an overt action. SCO has not contributed its code, and as soon as we became aware of the copyright violation we suspended our distribution" However, the kernel in question 2.4 was not taken down until two months after suit was filed against IBM. In facr the 2.4 Kernel is Still available.
-
Sql injection security bug at sco site.
-
Re:Selected searches from SCO's website
Pictures of Darl McBride sucking on my big juicy cock at the christmas party
Displaying documents 1-20 of total 3034 found. -
Re:Ok, -1 redundant
Even more interesting is the fact that the Investor Relations area on their site (http://ir.sco.com/) uses ColdFusion running on IIS. That's just sad on many levels.
-
Selected searches from SCO's websiteDarl McBride is a big yellow turd
Displaying documents 1-20 of total 2825 found.
1. SCO | Company | History of SCOPlans for the next weekly Pot-Party
Displaying documents 1-20 of total 2951 found.We think we rock big time
Displaying documents 1-20 of total 1116 found.nya nya nya nya take that suckers
Displaying documents 1-20 of total 1586 found.Why shit and waste it when you can burp and taste it.
-
Selected searches from SCO's websiteDarl McBride is a big yellow turd
Displaying documents 1-20 of total 2825 found.
1. SCO | Company | History of SCOPlans for the next weekly Pot-Party
Displaying documents 1-20 of total 2951 found.We think we rock big time
Displaying documents 1-20 of total 1116 found.nya nya nya nya take that suckers
Displaying documents 1-20 of total 1586 found.Why shit and waste it when you can burp and taste it.
-
Selected searches from SCO's websiteDarl McBride is a big yellow turd
Displaying documents 1-20 of total 2825 found.
1. SCO | Company | History of SCOPlans for the next weekly Pot-Party
Displaying documents 1-20 of total 2951 found.We think we rock big time
Displaying documents 1-20 of total 1116 found.nya nya nya nya take that suckers
Displaying documents 1-20 of total 1586 found.Why shit and waste it when you can burp and taste it.
-
Selected searches from SCO's websiteDarl McBride is a big yellow turd
Displaying documents 1-20 of total 2825 found.
1. SCO | Company | History of SCOPlans for the next weekly Pot-Party
Displaying documents 1-20 of total 2951 found.We think we rock big time
Displaying documents 1-20 of total 1116 found.nya nya nya nya take that suckers
Displaying documents 1-20 of total 1586 found.Why shit and waste it when you can burp and taste it.
-
Re:Already Happening...
... but we haven't seen the contracts.
If you want to see them:
SCO page on IBM lawsuit
Well, okay, sco.com is down right now, but it will come up eventually.
The contracts are in the Exhibits. Just start reading with Exhibit A. -
No they don't!
It took some time to explain to the government that the "bad guys" already have access to strong encryption.
The bad guys only used greek letter font you know -
Getting 2.4.13 free from SCO
ftp.sco.com has linux-2.4.13-21S.src.rpm from their OpenLinux distribution. It's free, and still available as of this morning (after the DoS ended...) Depending on your taste in distributions, you'll probably have to repackage it to use with whatever applications you need, and I don't know if there are any critical fixes after that. Sure, it's not as much fun as running 2.6.wildly.unstable, but it'll let you run a reasonably modern production environment.
-
Who caresWho cares about this?
What I want to know is why SCO is down?
-
HOWTO download the legal filings
Legal cases are generally public record, are they not?
Yes, they are. US federal courts offer electronic access through the PACER system, Public Access to Court Electronic Records.
PACER
First you have to register, which is free. Then PACER sends you an account login and password via snail mail.
The registration instructions say that if you are outside of the USA then you need to use the Fax registration form.
After you get a login and password (takes about a week), then you can login. Login and go to the appropriate court. You want District Court of Utah.
Search for party -- SCO. Then start clicking and reading!
Pacer costs $0.07 per page, but if you use less than $10.00 per calendar year, then the charges are waived.
Also the documents themselves often come in TIFF format which is a pain in the ass.
It would be worthwhile for someone to hit Pacer, download all the documents, convert them to gif or jpeg or pdf, and then offer them on a website.
In this particular case, SCO provides their own copies of the documents. They may not offer ALL the documents (especially damaging documents that IBM files) and you can't quite trust that the documents they display are actually the documents that they filed with the court (although if someone catches them cheating on this it would be a great news story). But you can start getting some instant gratification by reading here:
SCO Documents on IBM Lawsuit -
Re:First ..
Sco says that federal copyright law says you can only make _one_ copy of a piece of software and federal copyright law trumps the GPL in this case
I have never read this one backup rule in the law, but many people here believe it, so it must be true. But the copyright law does mention licensing and distribution, and they seem OK. It seems to work with publishers and retailers just fine. Your welcome to read all about it here.
The code released by SCO in their Linux packages is _probably_ GPLed. In order for it _not_ to be GPLed they have to argue that they didn't even look at what they're distributing. On the one hand they're saying that the violation is so extensive that it can't be undone. OTOH, they say that they didn't notice it was happening at first. It's not impossible, but it seems like they need to explain why this happened.
There is no reason for any of SCO's contribution to be GPLed. Look at Nvidia's and many other commercial offerings that are available to linux.
The big thing here is that they are attacking the GPL here. And, under the copyright law, they have to agree to the GPL in order to redistribute all of the GNU software that they have available at ftp://ftp.sco.com/ and most of their commercial offerings.
Interesting that they avoid the distribution issue alltogether, and are focusing on the IP. If you read their "Linux License", it does not cover distribution (SCO will not even give you a kernel for your $$), nor does it cover the source code at all. It is only a "runtime" license in binary form, its a "license to use".
In the unlikely event that SCO were to win its case regarding the GPL as being invalid, then they must either 1) write a lot of thier own code real quick or 2) fold the business because a most of thier products depend on GPL software.
