Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

USENIX Panel On SCO Lawsuit Now Available

Posted by timothy on from the sound-thrashing dept.

porkrind writes "No Starch Press and The USENIX Association co-sponsored a discussion on the SCO vs. IBM case at the USENIX Annual Technical Conference. Now you can listen as Chris DiBona, Don Marti, Jon "maddog" Hall, and others explain the nuances of the case. Click here for the MP3."

28 comments

  1. BitTorrent mirror of MP3 (~8mb) by mcgroarty · · Score: 3, Informative

    Should this thing get all slashdotted to hell, I've got a BitTorrent mirror of the MP3 available here.

  2. MP3 mirror by Laven · · Score: 3, Informative

    ftp://videl.ics.hawaii.edu/temp/usenix-slashdot/us enix.mp3
    Mirror of MP3 just in case of Slashdotting.

    1. Re:MP3 mirror by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slashdotting not too likely. This story wasn't front-paged. :(

  3. Oooh the big guns by ObviousGuy · · Score: 1

    Chris DiBona, Don Marti, Jon "maddog" Hall

    How about anyone who might have something important to say about the topic?

    What about the Samuel Palmisano or Steve Ballmer or Steve Jobs or Linus Torvalds?

    It's no surprise that a group of anti-SCO zealots come out with an anti-SCO position.

    --
    I have been pwned because my /. password was too easy to guess.
    1. Re:Oooh the big guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you taken the time to read all of the filed legal documents and their accompanying exhibits? Unless your reading comprehension skills are that of a high-school junior, it's pretty clear that SCO doesn't have a legal leg to stand on.

    2. Re:Oooh the big guns by tjawatts · · Score: 1

      What have Steve Ballmer and Steve Jobs got to do with this? Ballmer probably knows next to nothing about Unix, no idea about Jobs. Palmisano cant take part in such a discussion, he is part of the legal case, unlike SCO, IBM dont need to make noise. Torvalds can take part but he is not very political, he has already made comments (he is also named in the suit). Anyway, the guys have been involved in unix and the open source for a long time. Nobody claimed it was a balanced panel ;-)

    3. Re:Oooh the big guns by MrLint · · Score: 1

      Well teh pro-sco zealots have already been interviews and published online.

      Now quite frankly I dont think Stevie gives a damn as NeXt is based on BSD and as much as SCO wants to wish it away.. the BSD case is 20 years old. As for Ballmer, well if need be he'll buy SCO and bury it. Its not like MS hasnt done it before.

      Linus has had his bit and he think SCO are full of crap. So Sam is all yours.. have at it.

  4. I have by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Okay, not OG, just another AC.

    But yes, I've read all available documents and exhibits except for the NDA code specifically under scrutiny.

    From what I can tell SCO has quite a case if the NDA code can be proven to be illegally added to Linux. If not, then the whole case falls apart.

    Whoa. I just summarized that last 3 weeks of Slashdot in two sentences.

    1. Re:I have by Gaetano · · Score: 4, Informative

      80 lines of code makes quite a case? The NDA is to see 80 lines of code.

      Here is an essay from a person that signed the NDA. Here is a bit you may find interesting:

      Here is what I think I can say about the code I saw. The code is fairly trivial--the kind of stuff I wrote in school. The similar portions of the code were some 80 lines or so. Looking around the Net, I found close variants of the code, with the same comments and variable names, in sources other than Linux distributions. The code is not in a central part of the Linux kernel. The code does not appear to have been contributed to Linux by SCO or Caldera. The code exists in current versions of the Linux kernel.

      Doesn't sound like much of a case to me. Perhaps you mean if hundreds of thousands of lines of code, that would make it quite a case.

    2. Re:I have by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Here are the points as you have misunderstood them.

      1) The code exists in the kernel (regardless of whether it is in the "central part" or it or not).

      2) The code was put there by someone other than the copyright holder i.e. not SCO and not Caldera. IOW, this code is in there contrary to the wishes of the copyright owner.

      3) The code continues to exist, violating SCO's copyrights.

      Now, maybe the code just happened to match up byte for byte with SCO's code and this is all a big misunderstanding. Or, someone stupidly thought that they had the right to stick into the Linux code any old code they found useful.

      Considering the odds, the second one is the safer bet.

    3. Re:I have by Gaetano · · Score: 1

      What I seem to misunderstand is that you or the parent poster (if you are the same AC) think that 80 lines is "quite a case".

    4. Re:I have by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1 line or 1000 lines, it doesn't matter what YOU think constitutes "a case".

      The law prohibits verbatim copying of copyrighted materials.

    5. Re:I have by shadowbearer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It all depends on how clueless the judge is.

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    6. Re:I have by Edward+Scissorhands · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Your premiss number (2) is false. The code was put there by the copyright owner. The code in question, according to SCO's own claim, came from IBM's engineers. If you had read the legal filings (which I doubt you have), and in particular Exhibit C Paragraph 2, you would see that EVEN if IBM added code that they then added back to System V "derived works"; e.g., AIX or UnixWare, since the code was written by IBM's engineers, now pay attention, IBM OWNS THE SOURCE CODE EVEN IF IT WAS PLACED INTO SYSTEM V DERIVATIVE WORKS. Why do you think that IBM has been so curt and so blunt in their statements? This lawsuit is a joke, and it's pure FUD. Once the case goes to trial and lawyers get to debate it in front of a judge, I doubt it's going to stay around very long. In fact, I would imagine that IBM's lawyers will file a motion on the first day of proceedings for dismissal on the grounds of insufficient evidence.

      Regards,

      Edward

    7. Re:I have by hobit · · Score: 2, Informative

      The law prohibits verbatim copying of copyrighted materials.

      Not always. When working on a program and taking contributions from others the rule of thumb is that if it is less than 1 page don't worry about it too much. Fair use and the like protect you. It is like quoting from a book.

      Not saying 80 lines isn't enough for a court to rule infringment but the number of lines does matter.

      --
      As Nietsche famously said, "If you stare too long into the Abyss, 1d4 Tanar'ri of random type will attack you."
    8. Re:I have by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > 80 lines of code makes quite a case? The NDA is to see 80 lines of code.

      And you ASSumed that every person saw the same 80 lines, did you? Not very bright.

      Standard technique in such cases is to show each person a different set of code. Then, if any remarks about NDA-reviewed code leak out, SCO knows who to slam with a lawsuit.

      You also ASSumed that the 80 lines per person would be the whole show, all SCO has as exhibits for a court. Foolish again, strike 2.

      Care to go for #3?...

    9. Re:I have by ClosedSource · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's a bit dangerous to compare books and software. Fair use might protect you if you were merely publishing a small section of code as text, but incorporating it into a runnable product is a bit different. It would be more like incorporating 1 min of someone else's movie in your movie. I doubt that fair use would protect you in that case.

    10. Re:I have by schon · · Score: 3, Informative

      3) The code continues to exist, violating SCO's copyrights.

      Not quite.

      The alleged code continues to exist because SCO refuses to tell anyone where it is.

      Do some reading about the Doctrine of Laches. Basically, since SCO refuses to tell anyone where the alleged code is, then the alleged code is worthless to them. Since the code is worthless, SCO can't claim injury.

      That's why the first order of business in a copyright enforcement process is to tell the infringing party what it is they're doing wrong.

      By refusing to tell anyone where the alleged code is, so that it can be removed, they are essentially giving up any copyright claims they might have had.

  5. Sabotage! by saden1 · · Score: 0, Troll

    Posting a direct link to an mp3 file on slashdot amounts to nothing more than sabotage and an attempt to weaken our website global leadership position. I'll see you in court!

    --

    -----
    One is born into aristocracy, but mediocrity can only be achieved through hard work.
  6. One of the best comments... by mcgroarty · · Score: 4, Funny
    One of the best comments in the stream was that the estimated number of Linux users is about equal to SCO's current market cap.

    So, if every Linux user could go out and do something that cost SCO a dollar... :-)

    1. Re:One of the best comments... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      easy - call their 800 number to complain aboaut the lawsuit. Thats should cost them a buck or two.

    2. Re:One of the best comments... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But how do you tell everyone about it?

    3. Re:One of the best comments... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Post the number on the next sco story, saying "Don't just whine on /., call their number (free!) to complain about it." I'd do that myself if I cared enough to look the number up.

  7. None of them would speak on the record by porkrind · · Score: 1

    Believe me, I wanted to get someone from IBM, SCO, Novell, or Microsoft, but they were all unavailable for comment, for reasons that should be obvious.

    When it comes to lawsuits, the companies that are involved run far, far away from making public comments. So, I did the next best thing and got people who had spoken to everyone involved. You may think it's one-sided, but they offer a good analysis of the case.

    --
    Hyperic Community Manager
  8. Where are the slides? by Rick+Richardson · · Score: 1


    Does anybody know where the slides for this talk are?

  9. Gee yer neet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    can you teech me to be jus like yoo?

  10. Questions? Call 1-800-726-8649. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The SCO Group
    Product & Sales Inquiries:
    1-800-726-8649

    It probably only costs them pennies per minute of toll-free connect time, but add in their staffing costs and perhaps a simple inquiry could cost clost to $1.

    The SCO Group
    355 South 520 West
    Suite 100
    Lindon, Utah 84042 USA
    801-765-4999 phone
    801-765-1313 fax

    "Hello, The SCO Group. Can I help you?"

    "Yes, I have a question about your products. I run Linux right now, and I'm concerned about..." you take it from there...