Slashdot Mirror
More on SCO vs. IBM Lawsuit
Colin Stanners writes "SCO has held a TeleConference and put up a page with information on their lawsuit against IBM. The key phrase (from their complaint) is: 'It is not possible for Linux to rapidly reach UNIX performance standards for complete enterprise functionality without the misappropriation of UNIX code, methods or concepts to achieve such performance, and coordination by a larger developer, such as IBM.' Their page also includes a Q&A, presentation, and exhibits, although these are mostly licensing agreements and not code." Bruce Perens had an interesting comment on the situation, more than one group is trying to organize a boycott, and Newsforge has a story based on SCO's press conference this morning. Newsforge and Slashdot are both part of OSDN.
Interesting thing... if/when this resolves itself, and it's shown that SCO's allegations are false, and Linux DID scale to those performance levels in such a short period of time, this will weigh extremely favorably on the side of the effectiveness of the open source model.
-- Minds are like parachutes... they work best when open.
From bruce perens article:
SCO is also party to the GPL, which invalidates their patent portfolio for any of their patents that happen to have been used in a Linux system that they distributed. Under the GPL terms, if you distribute your patented practice in GPL software, you must grant a license to everyone to make use of that patent in any GPL software, for any field of use.
Would be interesting if it comes to court, if nothing else, just to see just how enforcable GPL is.
.ACMD setaloiv siht gnidaeR
What if SCO ends up being right in court?
Why would they poke the T-Rex that is IBM with a stick, unless they think they can bring it down?
We can sit around laughing or bitching or whining or moaning, but what will happen if there turns out to be code in Linux that we dont have the rights to, either by way of trade secrets or patents?
Can all the SysV and other SCO stuff be removed without killing Linux? Would a setback be weeks, months, years, or would it be the end?
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
He hit it right on the head here. After a lawsuit like this, who'd want to work with them? It's not worth the risk...
Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
'It is not possible for Linux to rapidly reach UNIX performance standards for complete enterprise functionality without the misappropriation of UNIX code, methods or concepts to achieve such performance, and coordination by a larger developer, such as IBM.'
So how long has this linux thing been going on, then? A mere day and a half, from the sound of things. And there aren't tens of thousands more programmers available for linux than any other O/S, are there?
"As a writer / novelist you might want to spellcheck your sig.
How about someone setting up a list for Linux Hackers willing to spend time migrating SCO customers to the linux platform for free. To fight back I am willing to spend some of my time.
Got Code?
From the complaint:
Except for SCO, none of the primary UNIX vendors ever developed a UNIX "flavor" to operate on an Intel-based processor chip set. This is because the earlier Intel processors were considered to have inadequate processing power for use in the more demanding enterprise market applications.
What about the x86 version of Solaris?
UNIX was developed by Ken Thomson in the 1960's. There was no AT&T USL in the 1960's.
More
The key word you used was "recipe". If your sister follows the same recipe, exactly, then yes, you are in violation of your NDA. If, however, your sister has a different recipe that just happens to taste similar, then you are not in violation of your NDA.
:)
Except the recipe is the source code.
"Times have not become more violent. They have just become more televised."
-Marilyn Manson
SCO is in the same position as Intergraph before it, and is trying the same gag. They're a formerly large and influential company, fallen to the point of minnowhood. They have no prospect of growing significantly, have no revenue, and no significant human capital. So they've gone the patent litigation route.
There's no obvious "strikebacks" at such a company (they're a lot like a "litigation proof" private citizen). Consumer actions or intensified competition won't work, as that is intended to interfere with revenue streams they don't have in the first place. Large tech companies (particularly IBM) might normally unleash a broadside of retaliatory IP lawsuits, but again SCO won't care much - that would interfere with revenue they don't have or enjoin actions they aren't taking. Their current claim is huge, but they'll try to negociate a more "reasonable" sum with IBM - one that would probably be less than the cost to IBM of the litigation.
Intel wouldn't roll over for Intergraph, and I'd guess IBM won't for SCO.
## W.Finlay McWalter ## http://www.mcwalter.org ##
If IBM bought SCO, they would have the IP rights to the original code, plus the name "UNIX" which is trademarked.
However, this must be entirely at the behest and with the intent of their majority holding group....Canopy Group
If someone can create a list of companies that Canopy Group has a majority stake in, then you have a focus for a boycott.
Exactly. Ordinarily you wouldn't throw stones from a glass house, but if your house is about to be run over by a bulldozer you'll be more inclined to chuck away.
This comment was generated by a Squadron of Ultra Ninjas
Shared libraries are by their nature unique creations based on various decisions to write code in certain ways, which are in great part random decisions of the software developers who create the shared library code base. There is no established way to create a specific shared library and the random choices in the location and access calls for "hooks" that are part of the creation of any shared library. Therefore, the mathematical probability of a customer being able to recreate the SCO OpenServer Shared Libraries without unauthorized access to or use of the source code of the SCO OpenServer Shared Libraries is nil.
Aside from the insult proffered to programmers everywhere (calling our decisions "random"), there's the real problem that it IS possible to duplicate functionality in shared libraries without the source code. Check out WINE as an excellent example.
SCO might have written their own death warrant by suing Big Blue. IBM has more software patents than Microsoft and Oracle combined, and probably has enough legal firepower in their patent portfolio to countersue SCO out of existance.
I doubt that anyone will miss them once IBM is finished mopping the floor with them.
> > "It is not possible for Linux to rapidly reach UNIX performance standards for complete enterprise functionality without the misappropriation of UNIX code"
> Sounds like Penis envy to me.
It's an incredibly stupid a priori claim to base a court case on, for sure. Do they expect the court to just accept it as a given and move directly to the penalty phase?
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
"My opinion Five years ago Linux was a better choice then that of SCO."
Just for the record, the company called SCO five years ago was a different company. Caldera purchased the IP when the original SCO ("Santa Cruz Operation, Inc.") died. (The rest of the old SCO is now Tarantella, Inc., which is struggling, but still around, and still occupying the old SCO headquarters in Santa Cruz, CA.)
When Caldera realized they weren't making any money off of their Linux products, they revived the old SCO trademark as "SCO Group".
So, while I agree with the sentiment of your post, I think your comparison of this SCO to the SCO of 5 years ago is meaningless. They're two different companies. The only thing they have in common is the name and ownership of the System V source.
But then, I'm Machivellian. Most corporations are too. But are we the same Machievellian? :-)
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
No no no.
I think the point is that if you've seen MSFT's source code you can no longer participate in developing anything related to a MSFT product; you'd be vulnerable to accusations of learning something from seeing that code and using the knowledge in your product.
Whether or not anything of value can be learned from viewing MSFT code is a different matter...
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
Never mind the fact that in the days of IBM's PS/2 systems (no not the sony toys - the 80386 era) you could get AIX for PS/2 so IBM had indeed prior knowledge to run UNIX on Intel CPUs.
--Ulrich
On no accounts allow a Vogon to read poetry at you
SCO group is acknowledging that Linux is as good as its Unix if anything through this lawsuit. It's like SCO telling its customers that Linux has competant enterprise functionality. This sounds like a great news for Linux to me.