Slashdot Mirror

I don't know much about how these things work, but FWIW, they confronted this issue last time with a 1-for-4 reverse split. Maybe the could do that again?

However, the combined cumulative effects of incestuous polygamy and living downwind from Dugway Proving Ground are beginning to exhibit themselves with a vengeance.

Aren't there already laws against unfair use of someone else's trademark? It strikes me that what this law may end up doing is making it illegal to say "My patented widget will turn your XBOX into a 100% effective chick magnet", even if that statement is 100% factual. There's got to be some existing legal argument why advertisers all over Known Space are not allowed to place the word "super" next to the word "bowl", even if the use of those two words is not even remotely infringing.

You know what, I did in fact read several posts all over the web that said Lxrun was GPL. However, I went to SCO's site to see if they really are distributing Linux libraries, and this is what I found:

1. There's a link to a linux-libs directory which no longer exists. that link is here. I have no proof there's been anything there in the last ten years or that there weren't sources under that directory somewhere when it did exist. The date on the link does not necessarily reflect when the directory actually existed, either.

2. There is actually a binary copy of something called ld.so in the lxrun tar.gz file available at this location So yes, there does seem to be an issue here after all. Now, I did say "seem to be". Let's dig a little more...

If you read the README files that come in the lxrun tar.gz file and the source comments for the ld-linux.c that's in the lxrun sources (hosted by SCO), they talk about including a fake ld-linux which just sets the environment in order to call the real ld-linux.so, and then go on to say where to get both the binary and the source for that. Look in this location and open any of the lxrun archive files there to see what I mean.

Now, there might still be some truth to the claims, since the fact that I didn't find it doesn't mean it's not out there somewhere. However, I went looking for some and still didn't see it. All I found for sure was there's an MPL-licensed package -- with source* -- which uses GPLed libraries. If that's what passes for a GPL violation, then I'm going to stop using GPLed software.

Now I hate SCO as much as the next guy. However, making accusations that can't be proven is their M.O., not mine. You can talk about anything you want being the real issue, but unless it's true and verifiable, it doesn't mean a damn. I don't actually doubt SCO has violated several licenses in several ways, because the people involved with them seem to have no respect for law or justice in any form. In this particular case, though, it may just be that there's not the smoking gun we'd all like.

* The versions available as binaries do not match exactly the versions for which source is available, but there are multiple binary versions and multiple source versions. The MPL, as I understand it, doesn't require one to distribute the source if it's unmodified anyway.

You know what, I did in fact read several posts all over the web that said Lxrun was GPL. However, I went to SCO's site to see if they really are distributing Linux libraries, and this is what I found:

1. There's a link to a linux-libs directory which no longer exists. that link is here. I have no proof there's been anything there in the last ten years or that there weren't sources under that directory somewhere when it did exist. The date on the link does not necessarily reflect when the directory actually existed, either.

2. There is actually a binary copy of something called ld.so in the lxrun tar.gz file available at this location So yes, there does seem to be an issue here after all. Now, I did say "seem to be". Let's dig a little more...

If you read the README files that come in the lxrun tar.gz file and the source comments for the ld-linux.c that's in the lxrun sources (hosted by SCO), they talk about including a fake ld-linux which just sets the environment in order to call the real ld-linux.so, and then go on to say where to get both the binary and the source for that. Look in this location and open any of the lxrun archive files there to see what I mean.

Now, there might still be some truth to the claims, since the fact that I didn't find it doesn't mean it's not out there somewhere. However, I went looking for some and still didn't see it. All I found for sure was there's an MPL-licensed package -- with source* -- which uses GPLed libraries. If that's what passes for a GPL violation, then I'm going to stop using GPLed software.

Now I hate SCO as much as the next guy. However, making accusations that can't be proven is their M.O., not mine. You can talk about anything you want being the real issue, but unless it's true and verifiable, it doesn't mean a damn. I don't actually doubt SCO has violated several licenses in several ways, because the people involved with them seem to have no respect for law or justice in any form. In this particular case, though, it may just be that there's not the smoking gun we'd all like.

* The versions available as binaries do not match exactly the versions for which source is available, but there are multiple binary versions and multiple source versions. The MPL, as I understand it, doesn't require one to distribute the source if it's unmodified anyway.

You know what, I did in fact read several posts all over the web that said Lxrun was GPL. However, I went to SCO's site to see if they really are distributing Linux libraries, and this is what I found:

1. There's a link to a linux-libs directory which no longer exists. that link is here. I have no proof there's been anything there in the last ten years or that there weren't sources under that directory somewhere when it did exist. The date on the link does not necessarily reflect when the directory actually existed, either.

2. There is actually a binary copy of something called ld.so in the lxrun tar.gz file available at this location So yes, there does seem to be an issue here after all. Now, I did say "seem to be". Let's dig a little more...

If you read the README files that come in the lxrun tar.gz file and the source comments for the ld-linux.c that's in the lxrun sources (hosted by SCO), they talk about including a fake ld-linux which just sets the environment in order to call the real ld-linux.so, and then go on to say where to get both the binary and the source for that. Look in this location and open any of the lxrun archive files there to see what I mean.

Now, there might still be some truth to the claims, since the fact that I didn't find it doesn't mean it's not out there somewhere. However, I went looking for some and still didn't see it. All I found for sure was there's an MPL-licensed package -- with source* -- which uses GPLed libraries. If that's what passes for a GPL violation, then I'm going to stop using GPLed software.

Now I hate SCO as much as the next guy. However, making accusations that can't be proven is their M.O., not mine. You can talk about anything you want being the real issue, but unless it's true and verifiable, it doesn't mean a damn. I don't actually doubt SCO has violated several licenses in several ways, because the people involved with them seem to have no respect for law or justice in any form. In this particular case, though, it may just be that there's not the smoking gun we'd all like.

* The versions available as binaries do not match exactly the versions for which source is available, but there are multiple binary versions and multiple source versions. The MPL, as I understand it, doesn't require one to distribute the source if it's unmodified anyway.

Is there a strategy for software startups wanting to make it big with a product in this world of software patents?

There're tons of strategies a small company with a patent portfolio could pursue.

Sincerely,
Darl McBride, SCO

I can see another $699/phone licensing fee for this, more if the phone runs on Linux. Besides just a lot of hurt to your hip

really clever...except the actual link is http://www.sco.com/success/

If you click on their "Successes" link from there, you get taken here: http://www.sco.com/successes/ hah.

And go to the menu item called 'successes': http://www.sco.com/successes/

And what does the page that is returned say?

"Document Not Found

To find the document you're looking for, please see our company"

LOL!

Looking at SCO's statement at http://www.sco.com/copyright/ I note that: * they are supporters of the DMCA * they believe freeware should be made illegal, ie. programmers have no right to give away software that they themselves write * they think growth of the US economy between 1976-1986 was due purely to changes in copyright laws * freeware developers are trying to circumvent laws * it's OK for them to impose license conditions but noone else * they don't give a damn about anything except their own profits etc. I mean, we all knew this, but it's funny to see them so baldly admitting it.

My favourite graph.

From SCO's own March 1 PR

Legal and other expenses incurred in connection with the Company's litigation were $654,000 for the first quarter of fiscal year 2007, which was down significantly from costs of $4,010,000 for the comparable quarter of the prior year and down from costs of $2,220,000 for the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2006. Because of the unique and unpredictable nature of the Company's litigation, the occurrence and timing of litigation-related expenses is difficult to predict, and will be difficult to predict in the future. While the Company expects to continue to incur legal expenses related to its ongoing litigation during the 2007 fiscal year, the Company's expectation is that those expenses will be less than they were for the 2006 fiscal year.

Perhaps they see the light at the end of the tunnel... and it's a train coming at them.

By UnixWare, do you mean this product from our friend in Utah? For some, UnixWare is considered the directly-inherited child of AT&T's Unix. However, it's a POS comparing to AIX and Linux

is anybody truly upset that IBM made a bunch of money cuz they threw a bunch of code and developer time at OSS projects?

this one group of guys was a while back, but i'm not sure anything came of it.

It was actually posted to Slashdot ages ago. Of course, it's very old and he might well have changed it by now. I have absolutely no idea whether this information is still accurate. Here's a copy of that old post:

End Reader Licensing Agreement

By reading this, you agree not to sue me and not to use this information in any illegal manner.

Here's all the contact info you should ever need for Mr. McBride.

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

Contact SCO online
http://www.thescogroup.com/company/feedback/index. html

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

IANASB either but according to my research you're correct. Investopedia.com says if a company trades under the minimum share price ($1) or the minimum market capitalization ($5 million) for 30 business days (i.e. 6 weeks in most cases) the company will get a delisting notice from NASDAQ that they have 90 days to get their stock to comply with the minimum value rules.

Btw, that's not the only way to get a delisting notice. SCOX became SCOXE for a short while after they got a delisting notice because they hadn't filed their 10-K in a timely fashion. SCOX press release from that time at http://ir.sco.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=1561 92.

Link to Investopedia article: http://www.investopedia.com/articles/02/032002.asp

It is clear from their home website below http://www.sco.com/scosource/ that the business model is built on spreading fear and uncertainity. From the page "Many IT users are concerned about using Linux since they have become aware of the allegations that Linux is an unauthorized derivative work of the UNIX® operating system. Users have come to SCO asking what they can do to continue to run their businesses. SCO has created the SCOsource business division in response to these needs. " Its not so muach as stating this is what sco does , but rather saying you the sinner better repent.

Please have a look at their services too... looks fantastic.

Hiring in India at that, so the above speculation on how much the developers are being paid is probably inaccurate... they probably have a couple hundred developers if they're paying $2mil/qtr and employing folks in New Delhi.

Looking at their services, I'm considering recommending the company I work for immediately employ their consulting services... I've no doubt these boys really know what they're doing. heh.

Please have a look at their services too... looks fantastic.

It's nice to see community achievements getting some positive recognition; especially when contrasted with the spectacle of the forces of evil, who oppose freedom, being panned in the press and in court ;-) It's a good end to the year!

Who would have thought it; we're not just a bunch of commie anti-capitalists and foil-hat wearing conspiracy theorists...

Hate to disappoint you, but this bunch could claim Prior Art.

Sorry for the fanboyish response, but I think releaseing various parts of Open Solaris under the GNU license would lead to some great developments. As I understand it, that would enable a lot of features of the Solaris kernel to be imported into Linux and vice-versa.

Probably because MS has enough money to slap them back with a legal team worth more than RIM's settlement itself.

I thought you were talking about that little Utah company selling an operating systems.

Oh wait, this is a topic about NTP.

People have been google-bombing phrases like litigious bastards, miserable failure, french military victories, and so on for years. But these are all going about it backwards. If someone isn't looking for "litigious bastards," they're not going to find out you think it applies to SCO .

I'm amazed it's taken people (outside of black-hat SEO and comment spammers) this long to start with the keywords end-users are likely to start with -- in this case, the names of the candidates -- and aim them at a site expressing the desired POV, rather than the other way around.

Think of them as a new company, that sells new/different products.

Yes, but it didnt go well when some other company similarly reinvented itself, selling new "products".

Sorry, I'm still too busy resisting this temptation.

"Does anyone happen to know what his involvement was, if any, with Novell's purchase of UnixWare from AT&T?"

http://www.sco.com/products/unixware714/

Since the lawsuits and the 1500 letters they sent out to major Linux users threatening them with lawsuits and Darl saying "Contracts are what you use against your customers," the market for UnixWare has dwindled to nothing. Your treasured UnixWare is attached to something that stinks like dead skunk, amorphophallus titanum, GAPO, rotten eggs, sewage, and the Devil's own brimstone combined. The next thing _less_ revolting than SCO is a pedophile rapist cannibal terrorist.

--
BMO

Research reports are only as good as the work that goes into them.

I stopped reading this one when I reached the bit where it says:

SCO, a small Swiss-based "vulture" firm

Goodness knows where they got this "Swiss-based" nonsense. SCO's web site doesn't even list Switzerland among the countries where it has a sales office!

and when you tired of useless eye candy , you can finally install a Real OS

***ducks***

You're just calling the wrong people: http://www.sco.com/

Ignorance is strength
Freedom is slavery
War is peace

Stay ignorant and repeat the lies, or learn and make your own oppinion. Your choice.

Package management and dependencies used to be a problem for me, then I learned of debian, games used to be a problem for me and then I learned of winex(cedega), I had a problem with MS office and then I found crossover, I had a problem with outlook and then I found evolution, I had a problem with single sign on and windows transparency over server message block then I found winbind... There are frustrated users, and then there are self educating *nix users.

In reality, the biggest failing is education, not cross compatible software.

Now where have I heard that one before...

Really? So you are saying no corporation has ever lost money pursuing some product or service because the CEO was stroking his ego?

Right, lets see what we have here. SCO Unix, a Unix variant which isn't really well known apart ofcourse from the black suiing pages. Further more; to use it I'd have to cough up quite some cash. But what can SCO Unix offer me more? Perhaps paying up even more to be allowed and use their development tools. I wonder what would happen if I fail to understand some of their licenses.

Now, on the other hand I know of this other company which also does something with Unix which, strangely enough, is available for free. Not only that, they even allow me to use their development tools completely free of charge. Not just that, no, whenever I use one of their products they send me a full license for the specific product which doesn't expire, doesn't allow this other company to suddenly go back on their promise, doesn't limit me to use their products and most of all: doesn't have this weird taste of hypocracy.

This other company even allows me to use their tools and technology to do some nifty mobile programming and I don't even have to attend any courses if I don't want to. Just read or download a tutorial online.

Gee, this is a hard choice. Do I go for some money which hardly covers my expenses and the option of a free car or do I go with free stuff available now which can (and is likely to:) dramaticly increase my options to find myself a nice job.

Such tough choices, NOT.

Right, lets see what we have here. SCO Unix, a Unix variant which isn't really well known apart ofcourse from the black suiing pages. Further more; to use it I'd have to cough up quite some cash. But what can SCO Unix offer me more? Perhaps paying up even more to be allowed and use their development tools. I wonder what would happen if I fail to understand some of their licenses.

Now, on the other hand I know of this other company which also does something with Unix which, strangely enough, is available for free. Not only that, they even allow me to use their development tools completely free of charge. Not just that, no, whenever I use one of their products they send me a full license for the specific product which doesn't expire, doesn't allow this other company to suddenly go back on their promise, doesn't limit me to use their products and most of all: doesn't have this weird taste of hypocracy.

This other company even allows me to use their tools and technology to do some nifty mobile programming and I don't even have to attend any courses if I don't want to. Just read or download a tutorial online.

Gee, this is a hard choice. Do I go for some money which hardly covers my expenses and the option of a free car or do I go with free stuff available now which can (and is likely to:) dramaticly increase my options to find myself a nice job.

Such tough choices, NOT.

I'd need some more evidence than an unsupported post on /. that MySQL is giving any aid or comfort to the enemy

They may not be sponsoring the wireless cr*p from SCO, but MySQL is clearly identified as a "Gold Sponsor" of SCO Forum 2006. See this page: Warning: Flash

While on the subject: that page must qualify as one of the most pointless uses of flash ever! And are they entering a competition for the ugliest front page to their website?

http://www.sco.com/products/mysql/

This is disgusting.

Mysql AB should be ashamed of themselves for this blatant support of an OSS attacker.

Postgresql
+better ANSI compliance
+ACID
+not a toy database
+doesn't support SCO finances

Make your move today!

litigious bastards

And don't you think a genuine press release would have turned up on the appropriate page on the SCO main site?

They still distribute other GPLed applications with/for their server software. First link i found: ftp://ftp2.sco.com/pub/skunkware/uw7/net/samba/

Sorry about the dupe post below. However, the latest press release according to their official archive dates back to June 8, and it's about their second quarter results.

Talk about fact-checking...

• Sun Microsystems Solaris and Linux Training
• IBM AIX Training
• IBM Linux Training
• HP's HP-UX Certification Training
• HP's Tru64 UNIX® Training
• Red Hat Training
• Novell SUSE Linux Training
• HP's NonStop UX Training
• Apple's Mac OS X Server Training
• And, if you're really sick... SCO's SCO UNIX Training

Who wants to go with me to the SCO Forum this year? Held, appropriately, at The Mirage.

To be even more explicit, the plaintiff is asserting the legal firm called him after finding his details on the internet. That ought to raise all sort of warning flags and brings the legal firms credibility in to further disrepute (it is possible that's a lie, but it would be a ridiculous thing to lie about as it's going to be reasonably easy to prove or disprove either way from call logs from the operator).

Did Sony hire Darl McBride or something?

You obviously want to work for these guys, some other productless organization, or these morally bankrupt fellows?. Maybe if you have good enough connections, you can get access to the diploma mill/SCOTUS anointment service for the well-heeled.

Guess Darl might sue LIC now :-)

http://www.sco.com/company/success/story.html?ID=6 0