Slashdot Mirror

Yes. everyone click on this. shlashdot and burn!

Got bandwidth? Mad at SCO? Download a 5mb file from here or launch an unspecified number of wget processes:

wget sco.com/images/pdf/eserver/eserver_sysadmin.pdf

This will teach you to administrate the SCO OpenLinux server, the only officially novell-compatible Linux distribution.

That's where all the contention is going to be. Check it out for yourself:

SCO Lawsuit Page

The Exhibit that I want to see is the contract between IBM and SCO for Project Monterey. There are three possibilities:

(1) IBM and SCO did not sign a contract for Monterey.
(2) There is a contract, and it's favorable to SCO.
(3) There is a contract, and it's favorable to IBM.

Possibility (1) is unlikely, considering that Monterey was a huge project for SCO, and that IBM doesn't start projects of any size at all without a contract for the IP rights.

Possibility (2) is unlikely, because SCO makes no reference to such a contract in their complaint or their amended complaint.

Which means that it's very likely that IBM will pull out a Project Monterey contract and it's going to be support IBM's position even more than Exhibit C already does.

But this is just the part of SCO's argument that doesn't make any sense. IBM's original license from AT&T contains an amendment to the effect that any derivative works developed by IBM belong to IBM. This is a direct quote from the letter of amendment (Exhibit C in SCO's complaint filed with the court):

Regarding Section 2.01, we [AT&T] agree that modifications and derivative works prepared by or for you [IBM] are owned by you.

The later agreement between IBM, SCO, and Novell specifies that, after a one-time payment from IBM to SCO, IBM has a fully paid-up, permanent, and irrevocable license.

Here's my take on what's going on here. I had a look at SCO's 10-Q filing with the SEC. It seems they are being sued over alleged securities fraud in connection with their IPO. I also noted from the Form 4 filings (insider transactions) that several of the senior people have been selling the stock in the last couple of months. I think this "litigation by press release" is all about trying to pump up the stock so the rats can get off the sinking ship.

(BTW, if you want to look at the agreements, they're on SCO's Web site.)

And in fact, it is still posted on their FTP servers: ftp://ftp.sco.com/pub/updates/OpenLinux/3.1.1/Serv er/CSSA-2003-020.0/SRPMS

According to an MSN search for SCO actually gave me SCO's home page at the top. In fact the first five hits go to SCO's site. But I was surpised to learn (emphasis added)

Long-time vendor of UNIX for PCs has made the transition to Linux. Learn about their consulting services and their software offerings.

The previous records for most dense mass are:1, 2 and 3 the rest of the list can be found here: with details here

The previous records for most dense mass are:1, 2 and 3 the rest of the list can be found here: with details here

The previous records for most dense mass are:1, 2 and 3 the rest of the list can be found here: with details here

The previous records for most dense mass are:1, 2 and 3 the rest of the list can be found here: with details here

The previous records for most dense mass are:1, 2 and 3 the rest of the list can be found here: with details here

See http://shop.sco.com/caldera/ancient.html to see the license on their own web server. But that's not really interesting because they've released all of this stuff except for System III under a BSD-style license (including advertising clause) in the meantime, as you can see at http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Caldera-license.pdf. Another interesting link is http://unixtools.sourceforge.net/, pointing to some System V userland code released by Caldera in 2001.

For more information on some of these Slashback topics, click here.

Just slashdot them.

Actually his son is one of the main lawyers working for SCO right now.

FWIW, local Utah Linux users despise SCO and are staging a protest in front of SCO's office this Friday (June 20) 3-5pm.
Here's the directions.
Come one, come all!

On the subject of loose cannon Senators, the Senator from Disney, Ernest Hollings, got quite a severe mocking today from Rush Limbaugh. Rush was making fun of Hollings saying that the problem with America was "too much consumption".

Can any good Mormons out there explain how the belief that you will (if you pay your tithes, etc) someday become a GOD affect your world view. This is on topic since Orin, Brent, Darl, and most of the SCO board are all apparently Mormons, as is the named Judge, Dale A. Kimball.

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah

Oh, I see why now. Perhaps he received some donations from other upset copyright holders.

"Regarding Section 2.01, we agree that modifications and derivative works prepared by or for you are owned by you. However, ownership of any portion or portions of SOFTWARE PRODUCTS included in any such modification or derivative work remain with us.".

Obviously, IBM would not agree to the software license as written. This certainly contradicts SCOs claim as far as AIX is concerned. Maybe Sequents lawyers were not as conscientious.

Quick! Everyone download a copy! :)

According to the sco website, the current company charter is "to manage its UNIX® System intellectual property, create new and innovative licensing programs to meet the changing demands of today's market, and to protect its intellectual property assets."

One out of three ain't bad.
Maybe they could simplify things and just say "create new, innovative, and demanding ways to manage IP assets."
That way they don't have to worry so much about their use of the phrase its IP assets.

AT&T grants to LICENSEE a personal, nontransferrable and nonexclusive right to use in the United STates each SOFTWARE PRODUCT identified in the one or more suppliments hereto, solely for LICENSEE'S own internal business purposes and solely or in conjunction with DESIGNATED CPUs for such SOFTWARE PRODUCT. Such right to use includes the right to modify such SIFTWARE PRODUCT and to prepare derivative works based on such SOFTWARE PRODUCT, provided the resulting materials are treated hereunder as part of the original SOFTWARE PRODUCT.

AT&T grants to LICENSEE a personal, nontransferrable and nonexclusive right to use in the United STates each SOFTWARE PRODUCT identified in the one or more suppliments hereto, solely for LICENSEE'S own internal business purposes and solely or in conjunction with DESIGNATED CPUs for such SOFTWARE PRODUCT. Such right to use includes the right to modify such SIFTWARE PRODUCT and to prepare derivative works based on such SOFTWARE PRODUCT, provided the resulting materials are treated hereunder as part of the original SOFTWARE PRODUCT.

In March, SCO Group surprised the world with a lawsuit seeking more than $1 billion against IBM in the case. An amended complaint filed Monday in U.S. District Court in Utah added more claims against IBM, tripled damages to at least $3 billion, sought an injunction prohibiting IBM from selling Unix and detailed some accusations of technology moved to Linux.

SCO seeks at least $1 billion in damages from IBM's alleged breach of its contract with SCO; another $1 billion for breach of the Unix contract signed by Sequent, which IBM acquired in 1999; and another $1 billion for unfair competition. SCO also seeks more for misappropriation of trade secrets and punitive damages.

The amended suit also asserts that SCO holds copyrights to Unix, a point that could be key in future Linux and Unix litigation. Novell, which owned Unix intellectual property before selling it to SCO's predecessor, initially disputed SCO's ownership, but later relented.

However, the suit still makes no claims of copyright violation, which several independent attorneys believe could lead to stronger claims than that of trade secret infringement. After the Novell spat, SCO said it had not registered those trademarks. Independent attorneys say SCO must register the trademarks before basing legal action on them.

SCO has made no secret in recent months that it hired high-profile attorney David Boies to spearhead its case against IBM, but the company's legal representation in Utah courts is also noteworthy. The company retained Brent O. Hatch and Mark F. James of the law firm Hatch, James & Dodge. Hatch is the son of Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, a representative for SCO confirmed Monday.

The suit specifically blames Linux founder and leader Linus Torvalds for allowing proprietary Unix code into Linux.

"As IBM executives know, a significant flaw of Linux is the inability and/or unwillingness of the Linux process manager, Linus Torvalds, to identify the intellectual property origins of contributed source code that comes in from those many different software developers. If source code is code copied from protected Unix code, there is no way for Linus Torvalds to identify that fact," the suit said. "As a result, a very significant amount of Unix protected code is currently found in Linux 2.4.x and Linux 2.5.x releases in violation of SCO's contractual rights and copyrights."

Torvalds said in an e-mail interview that the Linux developer community's process is transparent and called on SCO to reveal what its specific complaints are.

"It's not our side that isn't identifying the code. We'll work damn hard to identify everything they care to name," Torvalds said. "In fact, the source control system is out there in the public, and it identifies the source and the reason for patches," mentioning the BitKeeper repository he's used for the past two years to keep track of code in the heart, or kernel, of Linux.

Torvalds sided with IBM over what rights Big Blue has over its code. "IBM, as the original sole author to a particular piece of code, has full copyright rights, and they (not SCO) can use the code they wrote themselves in any way they see fit," Torvalds said.

In its amendment, the Lindon, Utah-based company toned down some of the language questioning the abilities

The second paragraphi is pretty much the formost modification to the novell/sco/ibm agreement found on the
exhibit d on sco site Ammendment X, section 1. No additional royalty... IBM will have irrevocable, fully paid and perpetual...

Ten million and some signatures can buy you UNIX. Can't keep the owner from shutting up.

The second paragraphi is pretty much the formost modification to the novell/sco/ibm agreement found on the exhibit d on sco site Ten million and some signatures can buy you UNIX. Can't keep the owner from shutting up.

On May 28, Univention GmbH obtained a preliminary injunction from the Bremen, Germany, Regional Court. The order prohibits SCO-Caldera from circulating.

Further, the Bremen Court Order provides for a fine of up to 250,000 Euros (around $250,000 U.S.) or jail time for every violation of the Court Order.

Weird, maybe it's because I don't have flash installed. Here it is: http://www.sco.com/images/flash/alt.jpg. With my luck they'll change it. ;-)

Though unrelated to the case itself, I still find it funny that SCO has kept their UnitedLinux page on its website given its spiteful accusations. Well, I guess that they are milking Linux (and IBM) for all that it can until the impending legal smackdown.

All of the court documents are available on SCO's web site including the notice letter. They're claming violation of the clause that reads "LICENSEE agrees that it shall hold SOFTWARE PRODUCTS subject to this Agreement in confidence for AT&T. LICENSEE further agrees that it shall not make any disclosure of such SOFTWARE PRODUCTS to anyone, except to employees of LICENSEE to whom such disclosure is necessary to the use for which rights are granted..."

If you look at page 2 of this document from SCO's site -- in a letter TO IBM, it quite clearly states:
"We agree that modifications and derivative works ... are owned by you"

The only qualification is that the actual lines of code from ATT's source code in the derivative works still belong to ATT.

Elsewhere, in the documents, I found a paragraph that implies that if IBM has someone look at the original source code, write new code, the new code belongs to IBM. This seems to completely destroy any argument that the "methods, etc" belong to SCO.

The second paragraph: "IBM's Unix license is irrevocable, perpetual and fully paid up. It cannot be terminated" is nothing but pissing on SCO's shoes. Beautiful, I can't suppress a beaming smile.

If I were IBM I wouldn't be smiling... IBM's license agreement with SCO (which SCO acquired from AT&T), says "If LICENSEE fails to fulfill one or more of its obligations under this Agreement, AT&T may, upon its election and in addition to any other remedies that it may have, at any time terminate all the rights granted by it hereunder by not less than two (2) months' written notice to LICENSEE specifying such breach, unless within the period of such notice all breaches specified therein shall have been remedied; upon such termination LICENSEE shall immediately discontinue use of and return or destroy all copies of SOFTWARE PRODUCTS subject to this agreement."

IANAL, but that seems pretty straightforward to me...

In other news, world-class journalistChristiane Amanpour has announced a new SourceForge project, AmanpourOS. It will include a realtime kernel, POSIX and Win32 compatability, a full suite of GNU tools, and of course a Journalling File System called CNNFS (CNNFS is Not aNother File System).

When asked how much code she had available on her project site presently, she replied "Code? Oh, I haven't written any code, really. All I did was get a sourceforge project up and secured an OSNews interview with Eugenia Loli-Queru. But that's the power of Open Source. These geeks, for whatever reason, seem to be obsessed with me, or any girl who has anything to do with computers, really. If they will slave away for millions of man-hours for Linus, just think what motivation my leadership can provide! Why the benefits in sheer x-ray and slideshow technology alone are simply staggering!"

SCO CEO Darl McBride, however, was clearly upset over the announcement. "What Ms. Amanpour is doing here is clearly wrong, violates contracts, SCO Intellectual Property, the USAPATRIOT Act, and any sense of human decency," McBride snarled as he slammed a playbook lent him by Hillary Rosen of the RIAA down on the table. "This blatantly contradicts prior agreements we feel we had with Ms. Amanpour as set down during dinner da - I mean meetings we may or may not have had as early as ten days before she is going to say she started this project, whenever that is."

Mr. McBride then turned his attention to suing the Netherlands over a violation of SCO's ownership of the idea of windmills. "And we are still looking for this infamous pirate De La Mancha, aka, Don Quixote. I have important leads from an informant named Dulcinea who says he has been stalking her in on the internet for centuries. With her testimony and that of Sancho Panza, we should soon put an end to him." McBride rubbed his hands together with great zeal and droooled at the prospect as we slipped quietly into the night, never to return to the quiet Maryland Mental facility where he now resides.

The licences between AT&T and IBM that are posted on SCO's site as Exhibit A and Exhibit B.

In section 3.03 of exhibit B it clearly states that "AT&T" may revoke the licence for non-compliance. Moreover paragraph 4 of the cover page contains a standard "no alterations unless signed in writing" clause. I see nothing that allows AT&T to sell this termination right without IBM's approval. There are similar sectoin in Exhibit A, section 6.03 and paragraph 4 of the cover page.

The licences between AT&T and IBM that are posted on SCO's site as Exhibit A and Exhibit B.

In section 3.03 of exhibit B it clearly states that "AT&T" may revoke the licence for non-compliance. Moreover paragraph 4 of the cover page contains a standard "no alterations unless signed in writing" clause. I see nothing that allows AT&T to sell this termination right without IBM's approval. There are similar sectoin in Exhibit A, section 6.03 and paragraph 4 of the cover page.

Let's just use all of SCO's bandwidth so they can't distribute any more press releases via their web site!

(removing the space in 'zip')
wget sco.com/images/pdf/education/SCO_AEP_posterfiles.z ip

or click here

leave them feedback here: SCO Feedback!
tell them what you think of their attempt at extortion.

SCO Alliance Partners

From SCO's Proxy Statement filing:

Ralph J. Yarro III has served as a member of the Company's Board of Directors since August 1998. Mr. Yarro has served as the President and Chief Executive Officer of The Canopy Group, Inc. since April 1995. Prior to joining The Canopy Group, Inc., he served as a graphic artist for the Noorda Family Trust. Mr. Yarro holds a BA from Brigham Young University.

Edward E. Iacobucci has served as a member of the Company's Board of Directors since January 2000. In 1989, Mr. Iacobucci co-founded Citrix Systems, Inc., a supplier of products and technologies that enable enterprise-wide deployment of software applications, and held the positions of Chief Technical Officer and Vice President of Strategy and Technology. In September 1991, he also became Chairman of the Board of Citrix. Mr. Iacobucci holds a BS from the Georgia Institute of Technology.

Darcy Mott has served as a member of the Company's Board of Directors since March of 2002. Mr. Mott has served as Vice President, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer of The Canopy Group, Inc., a technology investment company, since May 1999. Prior to joining Canopy, Mr. Mott served as Vice President and Treasurer of Novell, Inc., from December 1995 to September 1998 and prior to that position, Mr. Mott served in various other financial management positions for Novell since September 1986. Mr. Mott worked for Arthur Andersen & Company from 1977 to 1986. Mr. Mott is a certified public accountant and holds a B.S. degree in Accounting from Brigham Young University.

Thomas P. Raimondi, Jr. has served as a member of the Company's Board of Directors since September 1999. He has been with MTI Technology Corporation since 1987, serving as President and Chief Executive Officer since December 1999, as Chief Operating Officer from April 1998 to December 1999, as Senior Vice President and General Manager from January 1996 to April 1998 and as Vice President of Marketing from 1991 to 1996. Mr. Raimondi holds a bachelor of science degree in communications from the University of Maryland.

Steve Cakebread has served as a member of the Company's Board of Directors since July 2000. He has served as Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of SalesForce.com since June 2002 and prior to that was Chief Financial Officer of Autodesk, Inc. from 1997 to June 2002. Prior to joining Autodesk, he was Vice President of Finance with Silicon Graphics, Inc., a provider of computing and visualization solutions, from 1993 to 1997. Mr. Cakebread holds a BS from the University of California at Berkeley and an MBA from Indiana University.

R. Duff Thompson has served as a member of the Company's Board of Directors since May 2001. Mr. Thompson was appointed as a director of Tarantella in December 1995. Mr. Thompson has served as Managing General Partner of EsNet, Ltd., an investment group that is active in both technology and real estate ventures from 1996 to the present. From June 1994 to January 1996, he served as Senior Vice President of the Corporate Development Group of Novell, Inc. Prior to that time, he served as Executive Vice President and General Counsel for WordPerfect Corporation, and before joining WordPerfect Corporation in 1986, he was a partner with the Salt Lake City law firm of Callister, Duncan & Nebeker. Mr. Thompson is a former Chairman of the Board of the Business Software Alliance, a software industry association dealing with software industry issues. He also serves on the board of Syzygy AG, and serves on the board of O2 Exchange, Inc., a private company.

I think the Dukes of Hazard one might be a better fit though.

Have you seen this Darl guy?

Darl Pic

"Business" types with spiked hair scare me! What kind of name is Darl anyway?

Sontag isn't much better:

Sontag pic

I think I remember him from Animal House.

Hopefully we will get to track these guys careers down the tubes for the next couple of years. This will teach publicly traded companies to ask potential CEOs that they are at least old enough to have a drivers license. (Maybe an IQ test would be in order too, ever see these guys interviewed?)

I think the Dukes of Hazard one might be a better fit though.

Have you seen this Darl guy?

Darl Pic

"Business" types with spiked hair scare me! What kind of name is Darl anyway?

Sontag isn't much better:

Sontag pic

I think I remember him from Animal House.

Hopefully we will get to track these guys careers down the tubes for the next couple of years. This will teach publicly traded companies to ask potential CEOs that they are at least old enough to have a drivers license. (Maybe an IQ test would be in order too, ever see these guys interviewed?)

This will let them know how you feel, dont be shy!
Dear SCO,

I would like some of what you are smoking. Please hook a brother up. Thanks in advance.

Hey, I just noticed on SCO's page that they are having some kind of convention in Las Vegas in August. It would be fun to raise some sort of ruckus (read protest) in front of their convention.
I'm not about to organize such an event (hence the AC), but I'd probably go. I really need an excuse to go to Vegas again this year anyway. =D

The article is just this "press release" from SCO.

From NetCraft: Recent Changes at Notable Sites:

One site that has not changed is www.sco.com, where people continue to delight in the irony of SCO using the operating system whose deployment they are seeking to restrict.

I am not a lawyer (get this out the way first), but my opinion of some highly relevant issues:

According to McBride's public statements, SCO view all the *nix variants as derivatives of their stuff. If anybody is interested enough to discuss this, but doesn't remember, I'll locate the news links and post them.

However as far as IBM is concerned: IBM are fully authorized in their contract to create derivatives of *nix - use any methods in the source - sublicense it as they choose - and what's more the contract says IBM own any derivative products that they create. The only proviso appears to be IBM should not copy code or whatever associated paperwork came with it (copying ideas and methods is explicitly allowed).

Furthermore, it actually explicitly says this on SCO's own web site, and as part of SCO's evidence. Go, for example, to top of page 2: http://www.sco.com/scosource/ExhibitC.qxd.pdf

So now, I think, we have yet another problem with SCO's case (aside from GPL issue, ATT v BSD issue, whether code was copied from or to SCO, whether SCO have the copyrights, whether anything in *nix is a trade secret given it's history, BSD contamination in *nix history undermining any copyright claim to entire *nix source, etc): Namely IBM are allowed to do more or less whatever they like in and with derivative UNIX products, explicitly stated in the contracts with ATT (which SCO inherited).

>Wasting bandwidth can be a good way to take out
>your anger... and make them pay a few pennies in
>the process. Since bandwidth is so cheap, launching
>things like this won't really help. However, we can
>download the Linux kernel from SCO and then execute
>our GNU rights.

Your link was broken. Here's a real one.

Wasting bandwidth can be a good way to take out your anger... and make them pay a few pennies in the process. Since bandwidth is so cheap, launching things like this won't really help. However, we can download the Linux kernel from SCO and then execute our GNU rights.

Or, wget... removing the spaces.
wget ftp://ftp.sco.com/pub/updates/OpenLinux/3.1.1/Serv er/CSSA-2003-020.0/SRPMS

They are claiming two things - first that "someone" put their code into Linux.

Second, they are claiming that IBM used "knowledge" of their OS to make Linux better.

I am not a lawyer, but the SCO-IBM contract, published on SCO's site appears to grant IBM the right to create derivative works, and use the knowledge any way they likely. It more or less says that explicitly. The only thing forbidden is cut and paste of code. Go to this link, and look at the top of page 2 especially http://www.sco.com/scosource/ExhibitC.qxd.pdf

Article here: http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=10018 "Linux Coder puts SCO on notice". In short, the coder is annoyed they are distributing his code apparently out of compliance with GPL. My thoughts: This guy needs to get a lawyer and do this properly - i.e. a proper cease and desist, not an email. If we knew who it was, we could contribute to a legal fund to get him going.

From SCO's own site - I am not a lawyer - but it seems to clearly say - IBM appears to own any derivative works they create: http://www.sco.com/scosource/ExhibitC.qxd.pdf

For a company that seems to hate Linux so much it is funny to see via Netcraft that Sco's site SCO.COM is running Linux. Seemed they used to use SCO UNIX but switched to Linux according to the graphs. Yet IBM, that pushes Linux runs on AIX.