Slashdot Mirror
LinuxTag To SCO: Detail Code Theft Or Retract Claims
RoLi writes "Heise has a story (The babelfish translation sounds like a speech from Yoda, but the important facts are translated correctly.) about LinuxTag taking legal action against SCO. SCO will either have to retract their claims, disclose their "proof" (if it exists) or be fined. That's certainly good news."
Update: 05/26 17:25 GMT by T : Reader Fizz points to the more understandable LinuxTag press release (in English and German), and adds: "The notice, dated Friday, May 23, maintains that SCO Group is sowing uncertainty among the community of GNU/Linux users, developers and suppliers."
I've been swashdotted -- Elmer Fudd
The company I work for sells network security products, some of which are based on Linux. We have gotten inquiries from a large user saying that SCO sent their CEO a "cease and desist from using Linux" letter.
I can't confirm that SCO actually did this, and it's not just the customer's way of pushing the issue. But, either way, it shows their FUD campaign is working.
Which is basically what they are saying. FYI, you don't need bablefish, you just need to click on the british(or english?) flag.
What SCO is doing is could be considered slander IF they have no proof, thus slander is finable.
Well I say, SCO, show us what code you think Linux is infringing, and what proof you have that it came from IBM OR "SCO/UNIX IP"?
Only 'flamers' flame!
Does slashdot hate my posts?
If this lawsuit goes against linux, could this be the rebirth of BSD to the mainstream? The lawsuits in the early 90s nearly killed it, but now it is legally clear, so if Linux has problems legally we could revive BSD.
Although there is a problem because FreeBSD has problems with Christian owned companies in my experience. One of my clients got offended when I installed an OS whose logo was a Daemon. She made me install Solaris instead of FreeBSD because she didn't want a "Satanic" OS.
Wouldn't this be like E3 suing Electronic Arts because Electronic Arts alleges IP violation in say a ID Software Game?
Or like COMDEX suing Motorola, because they allege Ericsson stole some technology.
LinuxTag is a conference, a media event. I think they are grossly overstepping their bounds.
Would a "Car Show" sue a major car manufacturer because said manufacturer comes up with some legal case that threatens to make all other manufacturers indebted to them? They might be pissed, but filing some legal suit for such a 4th party participant in the field is misuse of the system.
-malakai
-Malakai
A Dragon Lives in my Garage
Neither the German nor the English text says anything at all about any legal action by LinuxTag. The piece in heise.de does say that lawyers have sent each other nastygrams. Lawyers do that all the time, I hear. I get the sense that people don't know what LinuxTag is. It's a trade show. Nowhere in any of the linked articles does anyone say what the legal theory for a lawsuit against SCO would be...especially by a trade show! Frankly, it'd be more of a story if there were such information. Nothin' to see here, people, move along...
They have cleary stated that Red Hat is one of the companies infringing on their IP. If I was in charge over at Red Hat I'd being suing them right now for libel and slander. They are in effect try to destroy the reputation of Red Hat through flase claims that are in all likelyhood causing Red Hat to lose business.
You simply can't issue press release after press release slandering a company legally.
Either Red Hat thinks this will all blow over or they are really guilty along with everyone else. Sitting on the sidelines is stupid IMO and the longer these SCO claims are out there the more credence they will accumulate.
Its not time for SCO to shit or get off the pot, its time for linux vendors and service providers to go on the offense and sue the crap out of SCO for the damage this is causing. That or face the music for the infringing IP.
If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
"The problem with this is that forcing SCO to disclose evidence in a civil trial before the appropriate time will harm their ability to make their case against IBM in court. Now, I assume that SCO has sued IBM in the US, but that this action is happening in Germany, but I would imagine treaties between the US and Germany would prevent a German court from doing anything that harms SCO's case in the US."
Why? How would disclosing the "evidence" in advance damage their case? If they have allegations and evidence to BACK IT UP, it will not be changed by public exposure. Even if there were infringing code in the kernel that were disclosed by SCO and changed tomorrow, there'd still be evidence that it WAS there.
Indeed, Caldera has to disclose their evidence IN ADVANCE to the defendants anyway, it's called discovery.
The ONLY way advance disclosure would "harm" Caldera is IF THERE IS NO EVIDENCE, that all their case is are lies, inuendo, smoke and mirrors. Which I suspect that it is. Disclosing REAL evidence of infringing code in public would only STRENGTHEN their case, and put pressure on IBM and others to buy them out.
No, the purpose of this suit is to keep the "facts" secret as long as possible to drag it out as long as possible to cause economic damage to Linux and businesses that do business in Linux so as to put pressure on them to buy out Caldera.
Corporatism != Free Market
I have a naive belief in balance in the universe. Of course, the universe takes a while to make its effects known ...
... I can't see how this could have any merit, and after all has been shown to be the usual FUD, it will strengthen free source software very much. I believe that's why Microsoft is keeping quiet. They can afford to throw a few million at SCO for "licensing" and never miss it when it turns out to be a lost cause. A few pantywaists will flee Linux. Anyone with half a brain will proceed as if nothing has happened, because, well, nothing *has* happened.
But anyway, I believe this will backfire badly on Microsoft. Of course they paid SCO a bunch of money to throw more FUD in Linux's way, and free source software in general. Whether or not they put SCO up to it in the first place, I don't know.
However
And after it's all over, Microsoft's arguments about the evils of free source software will look more and more inane.
Every tactic Microsoft has tried has backfired or at least failed, and the bigger the lie, the more egg on their face when it is discovered.
Infuriate left and right
Mr. Saint, Yes, both sides could potentially be wrong (or wronged), but your analysis of negative reaction to the pending suit as an attempt to gain moral ground is an oversimplification. I'll tackled just one portion of SCO suit, the claim of financial injury as a result of the supposed infusion of proprietary information into Linux code; the many other arguments as to the merits of this suit are available on this site and others. A plaintiff in a civil suit cannot claim damages unless he (or she) can demonstrate some previous or potential harm by which the absence of positive ruling would allow. By these limitations, SCO not only has to show its proprietary code found its way into Linux, but also that the introduction of this code has somehow given Linux (either the kernel or one of its many variants) a competitive edge, and has therefore hurt sales of SCO's own Unix product line. The question is - does SCO actually have a product which can compete with Linux on a even playing field? (or does SCO even market a product which could be construed as a competitor to Linux?) Suspiciously, SCO in its compliant has found it necessary to distort Linux's capabilities, stating among other things, that without big blue's help, Linux is a mere "hobbyist" attempt to play in league with(sic)'the professionals'. If SCO cannot show harm, that Linux unaided by IBM is incapable of competing with its own commercial Unix variant, then even if illicit code did enter into some application of Linux, its case is lost. Definitely by creating uncertainty and thereby delaying commitment to Linux by the computing enterprise, a competitor would gain some advantage, and this ultimately is one point SCO (and others)I'm sure are well aware of.