Slashdot Mirror
SCO Drops Linux, Says Current Vendors May Be Liable
Hank Scorpio writes "Well, SCO is at it again. I just received an email from their Developer Partner Program stating that not only are they suspending all future sales of their own Linux product (due to the alleged intellectual property violations), but they are also beginning to send out this letter to all existing commercial users of Linux, informing them that they may be liable for using Linux, a supposed infringing product. They mentioned that they will begin using tactics like those of the RIAA in taking action against end-users of Linux. This seems like it will be about as successful as the whole GIF ordeal a few years back. Where is UNISYS today? Is SCO litigating itself into irrelevance?"
... a BSD vs Linux war brewing
"I can not bring myself to believe that if knowledge presents danger, the solution is ignorance" - Isaac Asimov
Are you sure? I've heard rumors that BSD is dying.
What do Linux hippies use for birth control?
A) Nothing, kleenex don't get pregnant
B) Their personalities
C) Whatever it is, their mom should have used it.
There's no wrong answer!!!
Important information.
SCO/Caldera is part of a company called The Canopy Group. This company owns substantial chunks of other companies... that is its function. One of the companies it owns a large part of is TrollTech (as you can see from the canopy web page), whose QT toolkit is at the heart of the KDE desktop.
Now, KDE zealots and rabid TrollTech defenders have continually claimed that QT is GPLed -- at least the X version is, but TrollTech routinely violate the GPL by including extra restrictions. They furthermore claim that this protects them from any shennanigans on the part of TrollTech. As you can see from this action on SCO's part... this is not true. SCO/Canopy/Caldera own and control the very heart of the KDE desktop... they decide who can and cannot write commerical closed-source applications for the KDE desktop (to write a KDE app you *must* link with QT, and are therefore subject to the GPL unless you purchase a $3000 license from SCO/Canopy/TrollTech).
Check these facts out for yourself, and do not allow these people to stealth control the Linux desktop. Do not use KDE.
Ok, I'm not trolling. Hear me out:
= 8
SCO is claming Linux contains AT&T code. GNU/linux always claimed that they never had AT&T code, and thus not liable. But it has to go through the courts to be proved (taking time and money), which is what SCO is counting on. Meanwhile, FreeBSD has already gone through this process in the early ninety's, the outcome of which is that *all* AT&T code was removed from BSD (resulting in BSD-lite), and that noone could sue anyone using this code. Long live free software.
From the recent OSnews interview http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=3415&page
In any event, those files with USL copyrights on them have specific permission to be distributed by the Regents of the University of California to settle thse lawsuits, with an additional agreement that Novel (and its successors) would not sue anybody using systems on 4.4lite.
In Soviet Russia, articles before post read *you*!
I love the way it talks about "tortuous" (presumably instead of "tortious") interference. Sometimes there's a fine line between a simple typo and very strongly giving the impresssion that you don't know what the word you were meant to be using means. The idea of IBM tortuously interfering with them is wonderful though.
Linux is dead
Time to download FreeBSD...
If I had any points at the moment, this would be getting modded "troll". Not everything that goes wrong is Microsoft's fault. I personally don't like most of their products or tactics, but won't blame all of the stupidity in the world on them. Learn to appreciate and criticise on merits, not biases.
a.
Typical response from a penguin fetishist.
Go boink your plushie!
It appears the "viral" licensing plan based on the GPL was designed specifically to protect Linux development from the actions of the original "purported" owner - SCO.
How can you sue someone if there really isn't an actual "someone" to sue?
Linux, RMS and the rest of the Open Source/Free Sotware "advocates" planned this from the beginning, and it stinks of conspiracy.
1) Steal the Source Code.
2) Create legally incongruent and nebulous "licensing agreement" to show that not one singular person or entity "owns" the eventually-released code and executables.
3) Release "new" software based on STOLEN source code under new "licensing" scam.
4) No one is liable because no one is really getting paid to develop the new software - hence, no one is legally liable.
5) Make big money selling books, t-shirts, manuals, distributions of the new software and only charging "production" costs, and getting paid to make guest appearances at hacker-fests and trade-shows.
Linux is nothing more than a scam perpetrated by a Finnish software developer and a bunch of lackeys who also want in on the "I don't get paid but make money on the side" gravy-train - all at the expense of the careers of mindless-but-enthusiastic young people who are too chicken to do any real protesting so decide that they're going to be a rebel by using this cool software called "Linux"
Like I've said before: Linux will die on it's own sword.
Additionally, how much of a megalomaniac are you to use part of your own name in the software you developed:
Linux = Linus' UNIX
At least Bill Gate's company isn't called "BillySoft" or "Gatesware"
Chew on that, you penguin-boinkers!
ScottKin
I don't give a rat's behind about "karma" here or anywhere else. Don't like what I have to say here? Deal with it!
I've got to protest that frickin' "linux business" icon /. uses, with Tux dressed like a cocksucker, with a pussy tie, a bitchy suitcase, and a phallic looking cell phone. Tux would NEVER dress like a bitch. Some homo at /. (probably Tack) thought it was cute, no doubt, but TUX IS NOT A BITCH and would NEVER DRESS LIKE A BITCH!