Slashdot Mirror
Australian Linux User Group Fights Back Against SCO
ashitaka writes "The Sydney Morning Herald is reporting that an Open Source group has gone on the offensive in response to SCO's latest demands that Linux users must buy a Unixware license to avoid any possible future unpleasantries. 'Open Source Victoria today filed a complaint with the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, asking it to investigate SCO's activities in light of 'unsubstantiated claims and extortive legal threats for money' against possibly hundreds of thousands of Australians.' I especially like the last bit: 'One feels that this whole fiasco is the IT industry equivalent of a Nigerian scam or internet extortion ploy.' Oh yeah.."
Aussie Aussie Aussie!! OI OI OI!!
This is truly welcome news. The community there is actually standing up, which, honestly, is more than I can say for the general LUGs here in the states. I am not referencing IBM, I know that they've got to keep quite until their day in court. But aside from the random ranting, I haven't read very much about Linux standing up against SCO. Understandably, there is little to defend, since SCO has been too vague.
Additionally, I really enjoy Linus' comments in his recent interview.
Good work guys!
think before you write, it'll save me moderator points.
A dingo ate my license! And, at their LUG meetings, do they serve Bloomin' Onions? Because if so, I'm moving there and joining.
... and before anyone starts whining, this is of course not technically a lawsuit (yet). But investigation by a public commission might be even better, as things there are not dictated simply by who's got the most money.
Someone (Mad Dog?) said that Linux and OSS are international treasures that should be protected, and government intervention might be just what we need. Obviously US government would never intervene (Bush & all), but there is hope that e.g. EU or Oz might have something to say.
Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
Then I'm all for it! I just collected my $23 million dollars from the Nigerian government last week! I mean, seriously, what is there not to believe about such an offer? Now I'm all in favor of SCO! Maybe they'll give me ANOTHER $23 million! So I can buy some overpriced movie tickets! Boo MPAA ! (+5 Anti-MPAA)
BTW, /. should probably stop posting SCO stories every few hours and have a "Weekly SCO digest" feature (or "SCOback" like slashback) or something like that.
More news from the SCO front: Recent revelations that SCO copyrights did not extend to the NUMA, SMP and RCU code in Linux has lead to a new copyright audit by SCO's legal team to investigate the copyright status of Synchronous Queue Utilization Auto Tracking code (SQUAT).
"It appears from our latest audit that we may not have aquired SQUAT when we purchased AT&T's System V code."
When asked how this would effect SCO's plan to license the Linux kernel, "We never really believed that SQUAT had been copied from the UnixWare source code into Linux, so the fact that we don't own SQUAT has little bearing on our plans to sell Linux kernel licensing"
I suggest that those of us that live in the US do the same and file a complaint with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
You can file online here.
infested with jello like fishes no melotron wishes
From the website:
"OSV is a marketing, advocacy and focus group, which aims to raise the profile of Open Source Software (OSS) in Victoria."
Ven. Jhanrato
SCO..
Microsoft..
DirecTV..
MPAA/RIAA..
Did I miss something? Is this the Chinese "Year of the Evil Corperation"? Is modern business even legitimate business anymore? When did the underlying ethic behind fair competition become, "Enlist your friends, sue your enemies"?
Maybe if we stuck all SCO/Microsoft/MPAA/RIAA/etc's lawyers in a Monty Python worthy blender, grinding them into a fine red (or black, as some might claim) paste, we'd have enough environmentally friendly biodegradable waste to restore a rainforest somewhere.
Finally, a practical use for lawyers..
They came, they saw, they left, disguisted.
Maybe U.S. users should start taking the same action. Would the FTC listen?
US : Lots of noise, only 3 sane voices so far. ESR, RMS, Linus. Okay, Bruce.
Germany: LinuxTAG kicks SCO, gets injunction.
Australia: Fightback - no FUD please, we're Aussies.
New Zealand: InstallFest proceeds smoothly despite arm twisting from big gorillas.
Poland: Injunction.
India : Please use OpenSource (President of India)
Japan : Consortium of Electronics firms pledge to adopt Linux. Bride's personal visit futile.
UK : Refer US, above.
France: Do the French use computers?
Please fill up for remaining countries....
-
If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
Meanwhile, on Monday the company where I work received two fake "renew your domain" letters. Welcome to the modern business world...
You can file a complaint supporting OSV at http://www.accc.gov.au/about/fs-contact.htm - look for the complaint form.
Dear Sir / Madam
As the representative of a small business (XXXXXX) I am writing to support a recent complaint filed by the Open Source Victoria regarding the actions of the SCO Group.
SCO is making unspecific and unsubstantiated claims that it owns copyright pertaining to the Linux PC operating system. It is asking any companies using Linux to purchase licences or face the threat of legal action.
Would you please investigate the claims that SCO is making so that small businesses and other companies are not pressured into making unwarranted payments.
Sincerely,
:wq
Change of strategy-
SCO's Darl McBride states that Linux users in Australia and Germany are indemnified from potential litigation at this moment. McBride, in his trademark bold manner of speech, continues, "cuz they are all good folks, ya'know."
Because this is a battle of credibility at the moment. With no actual evidence on the loose, people will believe what appears to be the most credible information. The more people that fight and the fewer that roll over for SCO, the better it will be for the Linux community.
The more Linux groups fight back, the more the casual and business users will disregard the threats from SCO. The more dignified resistance we put forward, the more credibility the non-computer press will give us. I think this is great news coming in from Australia.
Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see. - Mark Twain
I conclude that SCOs next step will be to write to Microsoft explaining that they have a large amount of IP tied up in a foreign software product but are unable to get it out themselves. In exchange for 15% of their share capital...oh wait, they already did that. I guess it's going to be buying Utah politicians and going round selling "insurance" against your server being ripped out of the rack and thrown out the window next.
Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
There's no reason to prevent SCO from talking if no one is listening in the first place.
On the contrary, a lot of people and companies are listening. If they are allowed to say anything they want, with nobody providing counterarguments, the unwashed will start believing that they are right.
I am almost happy that they are openly attacking Linux right now (it was bound to happen sooner or later). At least this forces everyone to wake up, instead of just ignoring the case as a contract issue between IBM and SCO.
Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The first, "Your IP address is being broadcast to the entire world every time you use the Internet! Send us money!"
The second, "You are using Linux! Send us money!"
And apparently someone thinks my penis isn't long enough so I should pay them for that too.
e.g. EU or Oz
What about Canada? We use linux too eh?
Maybe somebody needs to go out and help dig up the various ways we can legally fight back against SCO et al. Various countries, various investigative bodies, various laws.... it's confusing. If somebody in the legal "know" gives us the options, then perhaps more groups will form together as an organized coalition again the "evils that be (tm)".
Yes, I already know about donating to the EFF, etc... but how about organized legal or political opposition? What are my options there
p.s. from experience I can say that Linux is gaining ground within various branches/sectors of the Canadian gov't... so perhaps they'd be more open-minded about such things?
If a lawsuit happy company contacts you directly, do not just 'throw it out', show it to a good lawyer. Since you are linking to college-paintball.com, it appears you may still be in college. That usually means a limited exposure to the Real World(tm), remember these important items.
- Any lawsuit can be bad news, even if you are right.
- Most good liars can convince judge and jury.
- A half-hearted defense looks like a guilty defense.
Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see. - Mark Twain
We call a spade a fscking shovel mate.
Nerd: Derogatory term typically directed at anybody with a lower Slashdot ID than you.
FROM: Mr. Darl McBride
A close business friend has given me you electonique address for communication as I have PRESSING CIRCUMSTANCES that require your assistence.
You see, I Mr. Darl McBride Esq. have a sum of US $100,000,000,000,000.00 due to me but can not on my own acquire these outstanding funds. You see I am the PRIME MINSTER OF CALDERA IP and as you may know have been DRIVEN INTO EXILE by IBM and their TYRRANICAL LINUX CONSPIRATORS AGAINST OUR SOVERIEGN NATION. Our matter of greatest importance demands that WE SEEK YOUR HELP. In return for assisting me, I will provide you 30% of the US $100,000,000,000,000.00 (US $30,000,000,000,000.00), all you need to do is provide me with your bank account number, a fascimile of your SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER, VALID DRIVERS LICENSE OR ID and CONSENT TO OUR NDA and LICENSING AGREEMENT.
YOU SEE, YOU HAVE MUCH TO GAIN and I trust and pray that you will provide us the assistence we require in this time of need.
> We all recognize that SCO is blowing hot air. Why not just ignore it? You get a nastygram from them, throw it out.
Surely it will be a valuable collectors' item in a couple of years?
> There's no reason to prevent SCO from talking if no one is listening in the first place.
Problem is, they're not spouting this nonsense for the benefit of well informed geeks. They're either targeting clueless PHBs (kamakazi attack on Linux hypothesis) or else clueless suckers wanting to make a quick buck on the stock market (finance golden parachutes hypothesis), and those people are going to listen whether we do or not. Far better that we should listen carefully and then point out the bullshit very publicly.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
From what I see and hear in computer stores everyone is hedging that Unix, SCO and IBM will self distruct and take Linux and open source with it. Such is the business attitude in Canada, they are all good MS sales people and will not rock the boat even if it sinks. The situation has become so monopolistic that it stinks.
OH THE SHAME I fell off the wagon and use sigs again!
As someone who works down the hall from the people at the ACCC who will end up handling these complaints, I should probably mention that they generally prefer contact by phone, rather than over the website's complaint form.
The number is 1300 302 502.
They'll want to ask you questions, and in theory they will just call you back if you put a complaint in through the web.
Bruce: Gentlemen, I'd like to introduce a chap from across the pond who's going to be joining us here at the 'Straylian LUG.
Bruces: G'day!
Darl McBride: Hello.
Bruce: Darl McBride, Bruce. Darl McBride, Bruce. Darl McBride, Bruce.
Bruce: Is your name not Bruce?
McBride: No, it's Darl.
Bruce: Mind if we call you Bruce to keep it clear?
Bruce: Gentlemen, I think we better start the LUG meeting. Before we start, though, I'd like to ask the padre for a prayer!
Bruce: Oh Stallman we beseech thee!
Bruces: Amen!
Bruce: Crack tube!
Bruce: Now I call upon Bruce to officially welcome Mr. McBride to the 'Straylian LUG.
Bruce: I'd like to welcome the slimy bastard to God's own OS, and remind him we don't like stuck-up sticky-beaks here.
Bruces: Hear, hear! Well spoken, Bruce!
Bruce: Bruce here is a kernel hacker, Bruce here is a system administrator, and Bruce here checks source code for copyright infringement. And is also in charge of the BitKeeper repository.
Bruce: What's New-Bruce going to do?
Bruce: New-Bruce will attempt to undermine the legality of the linux source code, mislead the public about the nature of SCO's copyrighted code, question the validity of the GPL, and possibly have a secret partnership with Microsoft to reduce the spread of linux in the server and desktop markets by using a smear campaign.
Bruce: But that's a load of bullsh%t!
Bruce: Awwww spit!
Bruce: Howls of derisive laughter, Bruce!
Bruces: Australia, Australia, Australia, Australia, we love ya! Amen!
Bruce: Another tube!
Bruce: Any questions?
Bruce: New-Bruce, Are you a monopolist?
Bruce: Are you a monopolist?
McBride: No!
Bruce: No. Right, I just want to remind you of the LUG member rules:
Rule 1: No monopolists!
Rule 2: No member of the LUG is to use SCO source code in the linux kernel... if there's anybody watching.
Rule 3: No monopolists!
Rule 4: Now this term, I don't want to see any member of the LUG not infringing on SCO's copyright.
Rule 5: No monopolists!
Rule 6: There is no!--- Rule 6!
Rule 7: No monopolists!
Right, that concludes the reading of the rules. Bruce!
Bruce: This here's the penguin, the emblem of our source. You can feed it nasty SCO code, if you don't get caught, of course. Amen!
Liiiiinuus Torvalds was nearly bald and made his own O-S, and linux it was called.
Billy Gates came to take it away, but his server couldn't cut it. Linux was here to stay!
Big Blue, Big Blue was supporting it too, and linux's growth seemed assured.
Then Darl McBride came along and tried to sucker punch linux in the gut.
There's nothing Stallman wouldn't call 'em when it came to G-P-L.
He figured all the naysayers could die and go to hell!
Buuuut linux wasn't taken and linux wasn't shaken. It wouldn't be that easy to kill(1)
The penguin's here to stay, and if McBride won't play he can take his silly lawsuit and go away.
Billy Gates, Billy Gates just stews and waits for the day when his junk is obsolete.
And come that day we'll all go play Doom 3 on our linux boxen. Sweeeeet!
Yes McBride can take his silly lawsuit and just go away.
'Cause the GPL will hold up and open source will save the day!
====
Sincerest apologies to Monty Python. And Australia, too. And linux... And the Australian LUG... And anyone mentioned in the above spoof. I'm truly sorry. Really. (And for the fact that the song meter isn't exactly correct... and that many of the facts mentioned are probably distorted. It's all just a joke, I promise!)
bytesmythe
Hypocrisy is the resin that holds the plywood of society together.
-- Scott Meyer
In germany SCO is already under an injunction for anticomptetitive practices. All it takes now will be for Linuxtag to go into courts again and make it stick. 300000 per case will drain the SCO battle chest very very fast.
Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
http://www.sigsegv.cx/
What you have to realise though is that the ACCC actually has teeth - they can ban SCO from doing any business in Australia, and slap whopping great multimillion dollar fines on SCO subsiduaries in Oz. They can also petition the Courts for Prison Terms for Company Officers.
OK, so maybe all SCO would do is stop doing business in Oz, well then Oz becomes a leader in OSS development and consulting to the USA's detriment.
This is actually better than a lawsuit. The ACCC has real teeth in Australia and can demand and enforce instant compliance. The fact that they use these powers for somewhat dubious outcomes is a point of contention here, but a referral their way has to be at least investigated.
These guys love publicity and this is win/win for them. They get to flex some muscle and no Aussie company(read Packer or Murdoch) will be asked to do anything.
I'm not much of a writer for this kind of stuff; but I hope this link will make others interested to the possebilities!
The ACCC has some serious teeth.
:
:
A few tech related things the ACCC has gotten into over the last 18 months
27 June 2003 ACCC Issues New Accounting Separation Rules for Telstra
26 March 2003 Consumers and Small Business Set to Gain from Lower Software Prices
21 February 2003 ACCC to Hold Public Inquiry into Internet Interconnection Services
20 December 2002 Full Federal Court Disapproves of Dell's Earlier Price Advertising
22 November 2002 ACCC Clears But Will Monitor Airline E-Commerce Joint Venture
17 October 2002 Internet Domain Name Resellers Warned Against Misleading, Deceptive Conduct
# 17 September 2002 ACCC Institutes Against Dodo Internet Pty Ltd
4 July 2002 Court Orders Dell to Publish Corrective Advertisements
I like the last three for some reason
29 July 2002 Game Over for Sony Playstation
19 April 2002 ACCC Leans Toward Intervention on Line Sharing, Tells Telstra to Get On With It
6 March 2002 Threats to C.D. Supplies Cost Record Companies $1M
Well , that's my link-whoring for today!
You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
There is a lot of hype here.
The ACCC, should they choose to follow through, are one of the better government funded Consumer/competition watchdogs. They have an almost free reign on who they investigate. A year or two back, they placed so much pressure on some major petroleum companies that the same companies were screaming for them to stop. They went through all the paperwork more thoroughly than a dose of the salts.
If SCO are bending the truth, this organization has the power to force them to submit all relevent documentation to prove their case without NDA, or alternatively they can forget about pressuring Australian Businesses into the licencing agreements. If the latter happens, it won't look too good for SCO elsewhere.
I hope they still have the teeth they had when Professor Allen Fels was in charge.
One commentator pointed out that the SCO farce was bad for the U.S. -- true, but more to the point, it is a symptom of a larger problem facing America. The legal system has ceased to function in any sane form, and it is hurting the U.S. bad. The lottery of trial by jury, abolished for good reason in almost all other western democracies, means that SCO could actually win this case in the U.S., while the rest of the world tells them to go jump in a lake. German companies such as SuSE won't be paying those license fees, that's for sure.
American readers should take note that the Constitution doesn't specify the details of how courts should be set up. Congress could overhaul the system any time they choose, and give the U.S. a system that doesn't suck money and talent from American companies and waste it on millionaire lawyers and legal fees. But then, Congress is full of lawyers...
Yes. A court ordered SCO not to make these claims against Linux until they could be proven in a full court case. To avoid a public court case in Germany, SCO signed a contract saying that they will pay 250.000 Euro if they continue such claims and took their German web site off-line.
A German article with Babelfish translation, another English article.
Several people submitted this story at the time, but somehow it got rejected.
They might intervene to kill it off...
Linux is a Weapon of Microsoft's Destruction.
I'll do it for cheesy poofs.
I'm glad to see the term "extortion" is now getting widespread press. The previous common description for SCO's activities has been "FUD" (apparently Linus' preferred term), and this unfortunately implies a semi-respectable strategy that many tech companies employ against competing products.
It's important not to underestimate the effect that labels can have in arguing one's case in a busy, harried world of people marginally familiar with an issue. Calling something "FUD" might not sway an IT manager or politician for whom the SCO issue is not completely clear; calling it "baseless extortion" is much more likely to raise the kind of ire needed to counteract this particular FUD in the mindset of the public and relevant decision-makers.
~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
It may be true that because of the current Bush administration appearing to favor corperate interests over the common good of the country may prevent them from interfering, but if IBM were to do any ammount of real lobbying, something would happen. I mean, look at it from the eyes of an elderly bumbling technologically incompetent public official. The odds they recognize IBM's muscle over whatever SCO appears to have seems to be a preatty clear cut answer IMHO, and with the appearance that "bigger is better" for corperation size to this administration, I think its rather evident who they would side with. Just sit back and watch the fireworks *if* it happens (doubtful, but interesting if it did).
We don't need an "overrated" so much as we need a "you completely missed the parent's point, dumbass..."
Instead file a complaint with the
Federal Trade Commission.
http://www.ftc.gov and click on
file a complaint right at the top.
Tell the FTC that SCO is making demands
for license fees based on unsubstantiated
claims. Keep the nastygram as evidence
for the FTC.
We need to fight fire with fire at this point. Please as you speak, write or post about the SCO situation use the following terms. They have stronger meaning, and are "stickier" ideas - that is they are more likely to be reproduced:
* Use the SCO scam to refer to the situation and use extortion letter to refer to correspondence for SCO to a company.
* always use unproven allegation and unsubstantiated claim before the mentioning copyright.
* Describe SCO's letter: a letter that demands payment for a product I simply don't use. or this letter is asking me to pay a lot of money, speculating that they might win a lawsuit one day and then come after me. or this letter demands payment without any basis at all!
* Be quick to point out that Linux was not written by IBM, it was written by individual programmers all over the world.
* Point out that no industry group, supports SCO's unsubstantiated claims.
* On SCO's motivation: SCO is failing and is desperate to make money by any means. And, SCO's core product which is being replaced by a more cost-effective solution Finally: SCO is attemting to hijack Linux because their core product can't compete.
Finally, if you get a letter from SCO, send a copy and a cover letter the situation to your state's attorney general and secretary of state. One state AG or SecState has the budget, resources and clout to pull the plug on the SCO Copyright Scam nationally. Believe me, SCO is not the Tobacco Industry...
-- $G
Actually, no he's not.
Chris Raehl is the President of the NCPA, the National Collegiate Paintball Association. His bio on that site says he attended the University of Illinois.
Incidentally, the paintball industry is in the middle of a very similar case of SCO-ism. The company "Smart Parts" recently got an old patent broadened to cover basically all guns that are electronic, which includes just about anything you see on the tourney circuit. They want to license their 'innovation' to all the other manufacturers now. Sound Familiar?
The owners of this company have gotten in trouble with the FTC for patent scams in the past, and there is plenty of prior art out there, but who has any confidence that a judge is going to make a sane decision about this given their track record lately.
The best place for up to date info on all this is http://www.automags.org
See you on the field!
Half of the slashdot crowd would starve if it wasn't for mom's cooking! The joke's on you, SCO, you pathetic losers... Oh wait.
If you've ever contributed code to GNU/Linux, then you may have some room to sue them for copyright violation and/or breach of contract (I think you'd defintitely want the legalese version of and/or).
One possible approach (especially for people with copyright interest in Linux code) would be to sue for a declaratory judgement that SCO has no rights to sue people for copyright violation or patent rights to any Linux code that's been distributed by them (or, at the very least, been distributed by them since they "became aware" that the impugned code was in Linux).
I think that one could also include suit for slander/0. 1libel -- especially given what they said in conjunction with their original complaint.
[note: you can't sue them for the original lawsuit, itself. Court filings have some sort of limited immunity against libel laws, but what they say outside the courtroom -- especially in press releases, et al. is potentially legally actionable].
I think that any such action should also include an injunction against them extorting companies for payments to prtect themselves against such actions.
The basis of the action would be that SCO is clearly now aware of the impugned violations, but they have not only continued to distribtute that impugned code under the GPL -- they have wilfully frustrated attempts to determine precisely what code is supposedly in violation (which would allow it's removal from the public code).
In frustrating attempts to determine which code could be removed to place Linux into compliance with any claimed copyright and/or patent rights, SCO is not only condoning the continued distribution of that code -- they are effectively forcing it's continued distribution. They are now claiming to have effectively poisoned the entirety of the Linux code base and, in that context, they are claiming effective control of that entire code base and attempting to effectively extort companies into buying 'protection' from SCO against this legal phantasm.
Note also: In the digital world, there is no way to tell the difference between allowing a copyright notice to remain in a piece of code and removing, then replacing that same notice. SCO's affirmative placement of GNU licence notices on their impugned code is indistinguishable from passive acceptance of its presence in code that they are distributing.
(That would be another declarative relief to ask for)
The longer-term relief to ask for from the courts would be for copyright violation. By attempting to limit the distribution of the Greater Linux code and by attempting to limit licencees to binary-only rights (in their latest moves), they are clearly in violation of both the spirit and letter of the GPL. As such, they have lost the redistribution rights to any Linux code that is not theirs, as of the initiation of their anti-linux campaing. Their continued distribution of that code absent the permissions given by the GPL are a copyright violation.
____
One final note: If the code that SCO attempted to NDA turned out to have not been code that was solely under their own copyright control, then attempting to NDA that code without the permission of the author who GPLed it would also be a violation of the GPL.
IANAL, but I like to play one in court sometimes.
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.