Slashdot Mirror


Skeptical Reactions To SCO From Around The Globe

Besides the recent action in Australia, lots of others are choosing to make affirmative statements denying SCO's claims to own the name and code of all things *nix. Read below for a wrap-up of some recent public reactions to the SCO claims from a wide range of potential litigants (if the SCO case gets that far): Japanese conglomerates, American department stores, Bruce Perens, kernel developer Richard Gooch via Mozillaquest, and Joe ("Citizen") Barr.

IpsissimusMarr writes "The Inquirer reports that 'The biggest computer manufacturers in Japan that build systems running Linux will hold out against blustering by SCO to extract license fees based upon unsubstantiated infringement claims, it has emerged.' Its nice to see more support from the business world denouncing SCO's tactics."

janda writes "ComputerWorld is reporting that several companies, including Coastal Transportation, Burlington Coat Factory, and Boscov's Department Store are taking a wait-and-see attitude towards SCO and their new 'Linux license' arrangement.

Best quote from the article:

'I don't remember signing anything with SCO saying I owe them any kind of licensing fees.' (Tom Pratt, Coastal Transportation)

I find it refreshing that companies are starting to stand up to SCO's blackmail attempts."

An anonymous reader points to this story at Mozillaquest according to which IBM says that SCO does not have a viable claim to JFS, NUMA, RCU, etc., writing "IBM says it owns the AIX code it contributed to the Linux kernel despite SCO claims that it has registered its Unix System V copyrights. A big problem for IBM and the GNU/Linux community might be the inclusion of JFS, NUMA software, RCU, etc into the Linux kernel. SCO claims it owns them. However, IBM, SuSE, and kernel.org's Richard Gooch reject SCO-Caldera and Darl McBride's claims that GNU/Linux contains SCO-owned or SCO-copyrighted code. ... The Linux kernel code is copyrighted under the GNU GPL. IBM owns its AIX additions and copyrights to Unix System V code and its development of JFS, RCU, and NUMA software code."

arilian writes "According to this article from ARNnet, SCO's new license may leave them open to litigation by other contributers to the Linux kernel." Bruce Perens and intellectual property lawyer Jim LaBarre are quoted in this one.

Finally, Joe Barr writes "I just filed a complaint against The SCO Group with the Securities and Exchange Commission. It was easy. I used their online complaint form at:

www.sec.gov/complaint/cf942sec9570.htm.

The basis for my complaint is that SCO is using false and unsubstantiated claims of IP rights to UNIX and Linux in order to manipulate its stock price and force consumers to purchase SCO licenses.

Maybe someone else would like to do the same."

15 of 495 comments (clear)

  1. Apathy by AllDigital · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This whole situation is really a gauge of the 'apathy' factor. How many peopel will be outraged and yet do nothing? I am not a LINUX or UNIX user, my company does not use LINUX or UNIX... and I see through this scam like double pane window. We should act by complaining now....or else we will get what we deserve! I also used the online complaint form at: www.sec.gov/complaint/cf942sec9570.htm.

    1. Re:Apathy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Unfortunately, although a ruling in favour of SCO in the United States would also affect me, I do not live in the United States. I'm not sure if that means I can sue them, if the ruling would apply to me, and so on. Added to that, I can't afford legal consultation at the moment.

      I would imagine one of the few questions I have above apply to many people out there, who are indeed very concerned about what this all means.

  2. Re:Student scared off Linux in .AU by garcia · · Score: 4, Insightful

    One word: Insane.

    One word: stupid.

    as far as posting a link for people to complain to the SEC about SCO's actions and how they are just to increase stock value... Great, just what we need. The SEC getting annoyed because 10k geeks decided to spam their form with anti-SCO propaganda.

    A few submissions are fine, a flood, no. I am sure that they are well aware of what SCO is doing and watching closely.

    Do you think that they don't read the news?

  3. Re:My favorite... by CableModemSniper · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Speaking of this, could someone make some sort of boilerplate for that form? I'd like to complain but I'm not sure exactly what to put in the fields.

    --
    Why not fork?
  4. Re:IBF Finally says something! by Penguinshit · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's actually up to SCO to put out substantiating evidence. Nothing has come so far except FUD and wild, far-reaching claims.

  5. SEC Form by aborchers · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you have used the FCC form, I assume you've done the research as to information they request, specifically all the contact info for SCO, etc. Could you be so kind as to post that info here so we don't all have to duplicate effort searching these people down?

    --
    Trouble making decisions? Just flip for it.
  6. Complaints are good... by Squidgee · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Complaints are good, but you want to have a _serious basis_ for them, not just geek conjecture.

    Otherwise, you're just going to piss the SEC off, and open yourself up for a lible suit.

  7. Re:Student scared off Linux in .AU by Otter · · Score: 4, Insightful
    as far as posting a link for people to complain to the SEC about SCO's actions and how they are just to increase stock value... Great, just what we need. The SEC getting annoyed because 10k geeks decided to spam their form with anti-SCO propaganda.

    Agreed. This isn't a freaking petition, or a web poll. If there's a legal case to be made, IBM probably has a lawyer or two on staff who can make the complaint more properly and direct it to the appropriate ears more directly than could be accomplished by thousands of shrieking Slashbots.

  8. Ever /used/ OpenServer or UNIXWare? by Craig+Ringer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you've ever actually used some of SCO's products, you'd understand why nobody will buy them, even under threat of lawsuit.

    The prices they charge for the crap they peddle are revolting, basically. It's UNIX all right - right out of '92.

    Craig Ringer

  9. Before anybody files any complaints... by Jerk+City+Troll · · Score: 5, Insightful

    (As if that were the case.) ...there needs to be some serious thought about what to say. You cannot just send complaints to the SEC or the FTC without hard, substantiated facts. In fact, the FTC doesn't want you to send complaints unless you have been directly affected. If you have been directly affected, you probably know what to do, so that leaves us with the SEC complaint form.

    I am not exactly sure just how the SEC should be approached with these issues. I am a Linux user, but SCO has not yet attempted to extort money from me. So I cannot issue a complaint on that basis.

    However, we are all aware of SCO's activities, and we find them ethically wrong and quite likely illegal. So what I am asking is does anybody have a generic, factual complaint summary that can be submitted the SEC?

    Most of us do not have time to pour over all of the material in this situation. Even if we could, most of us are not lawyers. Could someone who has an measure of authority on the subject volunteer some time advise the rest of us on how best to alert the SEC (or not to) without sounding like a bunch of Slashbots?

    I imagine a lot of people here are going to get themselves in trouble with the SEC by making silly accusations and libelous statements. A good write up would be appreciated or good reasons not to complain unless you've been approached by SCO to ensure that doesn't happen

  10. Re:Ooops.... by Arker · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Personally, I'd like to see SCO get bought out by the Linux community, who then votes to oust the CEOs without a golden parachute.

    At least until you can do it for less than a penny a share, that would be a horribly stupid waste of money. They have liabilities out the ass, and no real assets. Their stock price is absurdly high. If we bought them out we'd just be making them rich and ourselves poor.

    --
    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
  11. Re:SCO is still using Linux! by GreatDave · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So is the SEC.

    Considering the usage of Linux within the US Government, particularly in the intelligence area (see NSA SELinux), I wouldn't be half surprised if the government wasn't already up to something regarding SCO. With a good volume of slashdotters filing complaints with the SEC and FTC, something powerful could indeed be drawn from the woodwork.

    --
    "I am root. Bow before me." To this I say, "You are root, and you bear the sins of the world upon your shoulders."
  12. Re:Too bad you'd lose to a proxy fight by bobKali · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But what they're doing in only in the company's intrests short-term. It could be easily argued that their actions are damaging the long-term viability of SCO and are therefore BAD for the company.

    Ya know, I was initially disappointed that Monterey got canceled, but seeing SCO's true colors, I think that a successful project would've enabled them to be in stronger position when they would have inevitably pulled this Linux-hijacking attempt.

  13. Ok all you "Conservatives" by swaterman221 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Time to put up or shut up. If the -public- (not just SCO shareholders) can't request the SEC look into the truthfulness and legality of a company's executive officers activities (which by there very nature effect the stock price, and therefore the stock market, and thereofore interest rates, and therefore the economy, tax revune, the Federal budget, military pay, etc.) then what good is the law or the government? Does being politicaly "Conservative" (capital C) mean simply, following the "golden rule (who has the gold makes the rules?) or is the law taken seriously and accounting hijinks treated as the crime against the market, and society, they are? The market only works when criminals are kept from hijacking the efforts of innovators - theft is hardly very original.

  14. Re:Too bad you'd lose to a proxy fight by rc.loco · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, that's right. Money != Morality. Might makes right. Welcome to the adult world. Don't get me wrong, I think the SCO executive team should be put in the stockade for being a public nuisance. But the only way to stop them is going to be through fiscal, legislative, regulatory or legal means.
    You know what, I am tired of people/firms/governments assuming that you can unhitch business and moral/social responsibility without repercussions. It's not possible, it's a zero sum game ultimately. It seems like American business people (flame off, I'm American) are willing to be socially irresponsible if not downright morally reprehensible if it means good news for the "bottom line". I left corporate America for this very reason, despite taking a substantial hit financially as a consequence.

    Fill out the SEC form, talk to peers about the issue, do what you can to focus on the socially irresponsible aspects of SCO's misbehavior. Ok, so they didn't create capitalism as it's practiced in America, but they are reinforcing the very worst parts of it.

    Oh wait, I'm wasting my breath. This is America, land where 40% of our Senators are millionaires.

    --
    --rc