Slashdot Mirror

A company cannot slander Linux. Slander is the oral communication of false statements that injure a person's reputation. As Linux is not a person, slander doesn't apply. Also, Linus would not have a great case for the guy at SCO slandering him because of the nature of the statement. Stating that you are considering bringing a lawsuit against someone is not slander since it is probable that this statement is true, and hard to prove otherwise.

I would have to beg to differ. Firstly, SCO has directly slandered RMS and others in the Free Software movement with their statements, particularly their misquotes. They have directly slandered IBM (which is a corporation and therefore a person). They have indirectly slandered Linus yesterday, for I quote :

Think about if I was the CIO of a company and I'm going to be running my business on an operating system that has an intellectual property foundation that, by almost everyone's admission, is built on quicksand. There is no mechanism in Linux to ensure [the legality of] that intellectual property of the source code being contributed by various people.

...

based on the research that we have done, we have identified specific Unix System V code for which we have ownership rights that have ended up in Linux against our wishes. There is inappropriate intellectual property in Linux. The development process has no one that is ensuring that inappropriate code is not getting into Linux. All that's there is an honor system, and obviously there are a few, at least, that have broken that honor.

Also:

How many lines of code in the Linux kernel are a direct copyright violation? It's very extensive. It is many different sections of code ranging from five to 10 to 15 lines of code in multiple places that are of issue, up to large blocks of code that have been inappropriately copied into Linux in violation of our source-code licensing contract. That's in the kernel itself, so it is significant. It is not a line or two here or there. It was quite a surprise for us.

Now remember first that this is in the context of directly suing Linus. They are talking directly about code which is being committed to the kernel, which is Linus' job as maintainer of the Linux kernel. They are publicly claiming not only that Linus' methods are negligent, but that this idea is widely accepted and patently obvious. They are directly attacking his skills as an engineer and his reputation as an honest man.

Reading what Sontag had to say pissed me off because firstly it was a lie and secondly it was a direct attack on Linus' character and skills. If that is not slander, I do not know what is.

That said, I do not expect Linus to sue anyone, because

1) He is just not a suing kind of guy

2) He is not a hothead like me ;)

3) He is pretty wise in his dealings

Linus knows to keep his mouth shut and not be baited by SCO because he knows he is in a fight for his life, but also that SCO is going to hang themselves if we can be patient. Besides, all indications so far are that SCO has nothing. Linus, as the quintessential engineer, is waiting to see what the problem really is so he can fix it. Until SCO "produces the body" (GOD, can there be a habeus corpus for a situation like this? Too bad IANAL!) we don't know what they are talking about. By SCO's own admission, neither do they at this point.

As for RMS, well, damnit, many slashdotters have claimed he has no reputation to smear, and that is really very sad. I don't think he deserves half the hell people give him, and I think if he has lost reputation it is only because he has suffered many slings and arrows and continued to go on with his Holy Quest.

The URL http://www.sco.com/soss/ takes you to a very helpful page which, among other topics, has an address where you can "Report problems, make suggestions, get help". I certainly reported a problem with SCO & open source, suggested a few alternatives courses of action and asked for their help in understanding what they hoped to achieve. Maybe you have questions for SCO too... I might even send them another mail later today.

Now, as you can see from that page, it will be retired on June 16th and replaced with a new database. Unfortunately, the new database won't have all the same information available unless you are a reseller partner or have paid for support. There's a thread at comp.unix.sco.misc discussing this, and as you can imagine, even those who would still like to find some reason to feel good about SCO are more than annoyed.

In the interests of total honesty, at the moment at least it is easy and free to become a SCO partner and get full access to the database. But as SCO insiders have specifically said that the purpose of this is to generate more support income for resellers, how long will that last?

Also, if you are battling a problem at 2:00 am and google a link to the ta that would solve your problem, will you enjoy having to sign up as a partner to find out why the stupid thing won't boot? I doubt it. My bet is your next move would be to install Linux right over it..

...there will be an audio transcript somewhere.

From SCO's press release:
Replay will be available for two weeks following the call. To access the replay, call: 888-203-1112 or 719-457-0820, conference code #164628.

Well, since Caldera is now The SCO Group, maybe it's time they did get their own section.

Actually, it's pretty funny that a "major" UNIX vendor has gone this long without their own /. topic.

...so, SCO, is there any copied Linux code in your kernel? Because it seems like a huge coincidence that your "UNIX" system runs Linux binaries; how could a two-bit operation like Caldera reimplement so much of Linux without some help, eh? :)

(And for the record, they probably could have stolen...err appropriated code from FreeBSD. Also, note that Linux can run SCO binaries, through iBCS2. But that's likely because there's a standard that governs those binaries...)

It's only a matter of time before SCO decides they own the rights to all motion picture technology and tries to sue the RIAA.

Directly from the mouth of a horse named: SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION (WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549)

Check out Commission file number: 0-29911: ...

"On AugustÂ26, 2002, Caldera International,ÂInc. announced that it would change its name to The SCO Group,ÂInc. ("SCO") pending stockholder approval. The name change is in response to the strong brand recognition related to the SCO OpenServer and SCO UNIXWare product lines that has been created over the last several years.
...

The Company has an arrangement with Novell, Inc. ("Novell") in which it acts as an administrative agent in the collection of royalties for customers who deploy SVRx technology. Under the agency agreement, the Company collects all customer payments and remits 95 percent of the collected funds to Novell and retains 5 percent as an administrative fee. The Company records the 5 percent administrative fee as revenue in its consolidated statements of operations. The accompanying October 31, 2002 and 2001 consolidated balance sheets reflect the amounts collected related to this agency agreement but not yet remitted to Novell of $1,428,000 and $1,894,000, respectively, as restricted cash and royalty payable to Novell. The October 31, 2001 balances were reclassified from cash and equivalents and other royalties payable to conform to the current year presentation."

Well, in this case it may be had to fight for intellectual property.

So I don't see how SCO can claim that they own SYS V, it would seem they could only claim a sub-license disput with licenses..

Also of note they released there SP2 service pack for there Linux, supposely this has the IP removed from there Linux distro. Someone should compare the before and after and see if we can find out what they removed..

Why? Does the truth hurt?

For the answer, take your blinders off, place my quote in context, and look at the preceding sentence.

I tried the link, and was quite surprised. I can still download the 2.4.13-21S kernel binary. There's a welcome message in the pub directory that says:

Welcome to SCO's FTP site!

This site hosts UNIX software patches, device drivers and supplements from SCO.

The only reasonable explanation I could come up with is that its not for a new installation, only for updates and support of existing customer installations. I'm sure they are bound by support contracts to their customers (if there are any), and simply curtailing all support would make them liable for breach of contract. That gets pretty sticky, and IANAL. Who knows how they think. Or how the courts will rule...

As someone else pointed out, they are even still distributing the offending code right now.

Breaking News:

SCO has announced that is has claim to all IP related to supernovae. SCO claims it bought the rights to view and reproduce all supernovae images from NASA back in 1996. Another suit, targetted against the Catholic Church is insurance in case there really is a God that created the supernovae. If so, then God will be part of a future lawsuit.

Being that NASA uses UNIX computers to do much of it's work, SCO is also including IBM, Novell, Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson as defendents in the filings.

Further updates as we get them.

The company is profitable.

Ahem. Thats not what I heard listening to the beginning of the second quarter conference call.

Listen to the conference call on the SCO investor relations website. Correct me if im wrong, but i remember them saying that SCO had posted its lowest losses yet, which is a far cry from profitability.

And food for thought: If a SCO official is willing to lie in an interview about their financial status, doesent that make you even more apt to believe their lying about the whole linux thing??

Please stop saying that SCO gave their IP away simply by releasing a Linux distro.

Why? Does the truth hurt?

If they distributed their IP in GPL'd code without their knowledge, the GPL does not apply to that code,

True enough, but the fact is that once they found out about it, they continued distributing the code, and still distribute it - as in right now. (Try the link - really.)

Whether they stopped their distribution soon enough after discovery of the violation is a matter for the courts to rule on.

RIGHT NOW they are distributing it. RIGHT NOW they are aware of any of "their" IP in the kernel. This is months after they "discovered" the alleged infringement. That means that RIGHT NOW , they are giving license to everybody to their code under the GPL.

This is from their 10-K filing in Jan. Why would they pay if they owned it?

"Restricted Cash and Royalty Payable to Novell, Inc.

The Company has an arrangement with Novell, Inc. ("Novell") in which it acts as an administrative agent in the collection of royalties for customers who deploy SVRx technology. Under the agency agreement, the Company collects all customer payments and remits 95 percent of the collected funds to Novell and retains 5 percent as an administrative fee. The Company records the 5 percent administrative fee as revenue in its consolidated statements of operations. The accompanying October 31, 2002 and 2001 consolidated balance sheets reflect the amounts collected related to this agency agreement but not yet remitted to Novell of $1,428,000 and $1,894,000, respectively, as restricted cash and royalty payable to Novell. The October 31, 2001 balances were reclassified from cash and equivalents and other royalties payable to conform to the current year presentation."

...This story continues to amaze me...

What continues to amaze me is the following...

Netcraft reports that SCO's own website is running on Linux.

SCO is still apart of UnitedLinux

SCO's own phone number is 1-888-GO-LINUX

They sure have their hands in a lot of Linux for it being so "illegal".

is that the CEO of SCO/Caldera is Darl McBride. He was formerly with Novell as vice president and general manager of Novell's Embedded Systems Division (NEST).

SCO either have got unix patients or are lieing: Read this from SCO's website (http://www.sco.com/scosource/) "SCO is the owner of the UNIX Operating System Intellectual Property that dates all the way back 1969, when the UNIX System was created at Bell Laboratories. Through a series of mergers and acquisitions, SCO has acquired ownership of the patents, copyrights and core technology associated with the UNIX System. The SCO source division will continue to offer traditional UNIX System licenses to preserve, protect and enhance shareholder value." (http://www.sco.com/scosource/) Seams they think they own more than they do; or they own more than we think they do..

This is from their 10-K filing in Jan. Why would they pay if they owned it?

"Restricted Cash and Royalty Payable to Novell, Inc.

The Company has an arrangement with Novell, Inc. ("Novell") in which it acts as an administrative agent in the collection of royalties for customers who deploy SVRx technology. Under the agency agreement, the Company collects all customer payments and remits 95 percent of the collected funds to Novell and retains 5 percent as an administrative fee. The Company records the 5 percent administrative fee as revenue in its consolidated statements of operations. The accompanying October 31, 2002 and 2001 consolidated balance sheets reflect the amounts collected related to this agency agreement but not yet remitted to Novell of $1,428,000 and $1,894,000, respectively, as restricted cash and royalty payable to Novell. The October 31, 2001 balances were reclassified from cash and equivalents and other royalties payable to conform to the current year presentation. "

Read for yourself:

HERE

Let those fuckers know how you feel! Send it!

Salt Lake City is easily accessible by air (a Delta Airlines hub.) It's a 2-hour non-stop flight from any of the SF Bay Area's three major airports. Or a 1-1/2 day drive if you prefer a road trip.

This is also affective. PRESS SEND

Only one way to tell them. Press send!!

Let those assholes know!

...given this SCO response to Novell's recent open letter. It says, and I quote,

"SCO® owns the contract rights to the UNIX® operating system. SCO has the contractual right to prevent improper donations of UNIX code, methods or concepts into Linux® by any UNIX vendor." (Italics mine).

They go on to say that:

"Copyrights and patents are protection against strangers. Contracts are what you use against parties you have relationships with. From a legal standpoint, contracts end up being far stronger than anything you could do with copyrights."

For those who won't take the time to read the Novell letter, Novell claims to hold all of the patents and copyrights for the Unix operating system, thus refuting SCO's claim to IP rights.

--

"Depth is to your life what dead air is to a talk show."

Thomas de Zengatita

Send!!! This isn't too creative but if a few thousand slashdoters click my link they'll get the point. >: )

The SCO webmasters might want to change a few bits of information of their site... such as this page

A lot of patents owned by other people mention SCO as an example of a Unix system. That is by far the largest source of mentions of their company name in the patent database.

So, where's the ammo in Darl's gun? No patents. No copyrights for the stuff he said he owned. No trade secrets, as far as I can tell.

And then, to threaten Linus Torvalds as an individual sounds especially whiny. multi-Million-dollar corporation sues San Jose programmer who has made a life of giving his work away for free. SCO has descended to playground-bully level.

Karsten Self revealed this interesting tidbit from SCO's 10K report:

The Company has an arrangement with Novell, Inc. ("Novell") in which it acts as an administrative agent in the collection of royalties for customers who deploy SVRx technology. Under the agency agreement, the Company collects all customer payments and remits 95 percent of the collected funds to Novell and retains 5 percent as an administrative fee. The Company records the 5 percent administrative fee as revenue in its consolidated statements of operations. The accompanying October 31, 2002 and 2001 consolidated balance sheets reflect the amounts collected related to this agency agreement but not yet remitted to Novell of $1,428,000 and $1,894,000, respectively, as restricted cash and royalty payable to Novell. The October 31, 2001 balances were reclassified from cash and equivalents and other royalties payable to conform to the current year presentation.

That proves the Novell allegation.

SCO stock dropped from $9 to $6 today. I'm surprised it closed that high.

Bruce

Due to the viral GNU GPL license everything you put on the scanner becomes open source if you use this program.
The main GNU leaders believe the intellectual property has no justification and must therefore turned into open source at any possibility.
Furthermore it's very likely that SCO will claim ownership of everything you scanned (this includes your wife and cat) due to the Unix IP violations in the Linux kernel.

?? SCO's press release is attributed correctly. Perhaps you read this elsewhere?

I just finished listening to the mp3 transcript of the earnings con call. fascinating to hear that quite a bit of revenue (and hype) comes from customer wins around the world -- only thing is, that they're Linux related, a product SCO no longer offers in their portfolio. of course there's no specific breakdown on the balance sheet on SCO's site.

I don't know how many people actually listened to this call, but only TWO people had -- or were allowed to ask -- questions.

I just finished listening to the mp3 transcript of the earnings con call. fascinating to hear that quite a bit of revenue (and hype) comes from customer wins around the world -- only thing is, that they're Linux related, a product SCO no longer offers in their portfolio. of course there's no specific breakdown on the balance sheet on SCO's site.

I don't know how many people actually listened to this call, but only TWO people had -- or were allowed to ask -- questions.

..that after all the whining they have done, they can still have this on their website:

United Linux

With claims like

"UnitedLinux provides the Linux business user with operating system platform that is focused on their needs and provides a greater choice of applications and hardware. The four geographically strong Linux partners, with headquarters in Asia, Europe, and South and North America, make it easier to provide local language support, training, and professional services. Customers now have a true international version of Linux. UnitedLinux enables more rapid adoption of Linux in the enterprise, which, in turn allows customers to reap the benefits of Linux with lower risk and cost."

it makes you wonder just how two faced they can be

That was last quarter. This quarter was a $4.5 mil profit.

2nd quarter '03

Conference call is over. Get the Replay here.

SCO's site still lists IBM as a SCO Alliance Partner.

SCO is contradicting itself like mad. As you pointed out, SCO is claiming that this whole mess doesn't have anything to do with owning UNIX or System V. Yet the SCOsource homepage directly contradicts the statement that SCO doesn't own the IP. Ooooops.

SCO is contradicting itself like mad. As you pointed out, SCO is claiming that this whole mess doesn't have anything to do with owning UNIX or System V. Yet the SCOsource homepage directly contradicts the statement that SCO doesn't own the IP. Ooooops.

From this interview, I'm getting the sense that SCO is trying to argue that IBM wrote some code with SCO and took this same code and transfered it to Linux. Assuming the new code was somehow bound to the SCO UNIX license agreement, this argument might tred water if IBM released this same code under another license (ie: GPL).

The real FUD here is that SCO is trying to claim the Linux codebase is fundamentally a copy of UNIX System V. From SCO's original letter:

"We believe that Linux infringes on our UNIX intellectual property and other rights."

Oops... Clearly SCO does not own the IP to UNIX, this belongs to Novell. SCO is a merely a clearinghouse for managing the UNIX licensing. These words may come back to haunt them.

The new code developed jointly between IBM and SCO could be in question here, but this does not warrent a mass mailing to everyone in silicon valley. There will be reparations made, SCO has misstated the facts.

More FUD can be found here. The Stallman quote is most telling, "There is very little new stuff in Linux.". Stallman is not implying that Linux is a copylefted UNIX (as SCO would have you believe), but rather that Linux borrows the UNIX paradigm (pipes, processes, small programs for each command, etc.).

Don't be surprised when IBM, HP, Novell and others slap SCO a classaction lawsuite putting them in violation of their glorified UNIX policeman title.

In addition to the conference call number, you can listen to the SCO conference call online.

They're Investor Relations Page says, you can listen here.

Here's a blurb from their page;

You may also join via listen-only web cast by clicking on the url located at http://ir.sco.com/conference.cfm or www.companyboardroom.com.

In addition to the conference call number, you can listen to the SCO conference call online.

They're Investor Relations Page says, you can listen here.

Here's a blurb from their page;

You may also join via listen-only web cast by clicking on the url located at http://ir.sco.com/conference.cfm or www.companyboardroom.com.

Looks like it's now here. I guess they're moving the press releases around. Well you can run SCO, but you can't hide!

For the proper pass codes and the correct numbers, the SCO Investor Relation's site has the info.

Found the press release on SCO's press releases site... The declarations of trademarks included there, so I assume that SCO is behind it.

UNIX is a registered trademark of The Open Group
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds.

Read the response here.

And by the way, I like gay anal sex.

From the page of SCOsource:


SCOsource is a new business division to manage its UNIX® System intellectual property. The charter of the new division is to create new and innovative licensing programs to meet the changing demands of today's market and to protect its intellectual property asset.

SCO is the owner of the UNIX Operating System Intellectual Property that dates all the way back 1969, when the UNIX System was created at Bell Laboratories. Through a series of mergers and acquisitions, SCO has acquired ownership of the patents, copyrights and core technology associated with the UNIX System. The SCO source division will continue to offer traditional UNIX System licenses to preserve, protect and enhance shareholder value.


So they do make these claims. Let's see how long it stays up like this.

SCOsource

SCO can sue IBM for breach of contract. IBM can lose. It'll not make a blind bit of difference to anyone except IBM and SCO and anyone else who signed a contract with SCO.

Anything generically aimed at Linux now is FUD.

or call their Product and Sales Inquiries number:
1-888-GO-LINUX

while i'm at it, linked for your pleasure:
http://www.sco.com/company/feedback/index.html