Slashdot Mirror
Red Hat Sues SCO, Sets Up Legal Fund
An anonymous reader writes "Red Hat has released a PR Newswire article stating that it intends to sue SCO Group to prove that it doesn't infringe any of SCO's intellectual property regarding the Red Hat Linux platform, and to hold it accountable for its actions and smear campaign. They've also announced the creation of a legal fund, to which they've pledged $1M US dollars to fight complaints such as these, called the 'Open Source Now' fund."
I'm sorry, but IBM (the company that has made billions in revenue off GNU/Linux) should be floating the bill. Red Hat is too poor to be getting into a legal slug fest with a company that has literally transformed themselves into a litigation firm. IBM has the money to fight, while Red Hat might end up getting dragged through the proverbial legal-mud, and never really get anywhere.
What might serve Red Hat better is to send their customers information regarding how absurd SCOs claims are, complete with the opinions of legal experts on the matter, like the OSDLs terrific "position paper". The people, especially those in the corporate world, have to be clearly shown how absurd and evil SCOs actions have been. Litigation by a small company is going to be long, expensive, and perhaps in the end fruitless.
Regarding the OSDL's paper, I personally like the analogy made concerning publishing houses:
Imagine the literary equivalent of SCO's current bluster:
Publishing house A alleges that the bestselling novel by Author X topping the charts from Publisher B plagiarizes its own more obscure novel by Author Y. "But," the chairman of Publisher A announces at a news conference, "we're not suing Author X or Publisher B; we're only suing all the people who bought X's book. They have to pay us for a license to read the book immediately, or we'll come after them." That doesn't happen, because that's not the law.
This story is here as well:
Red Hat files suit against SCO
Does this help RedHat's customers? I mean, SCO can't really do anything to RedHat's customers while they are involved in a lawsuit with RedHat themselves?
Or can they? I honestly don't know...
As seen on Yahoo Finance. Time to buy? :)
Went out and bought anoter copy of Red Hat at lunch and mail Red Hat $10 for the legal fund. If only 5% of slashdot readers followed suit :)
-=[ Who Is John Galt? ]=-
Red Hat has 90 million in cash and short terms, hardly "poor".
http://biz.yahoo.com/fin/l/r/rhat_qb.html
The people, especially those in the corporate world, have to be clearly shown how absurd and evil SCOs actions have been.
I almost think that not enough emphasis is being placed on this point. SCO should have notified of their intent to sue way, way, beforehand. What they did instead was basically say "Here's your month, and tell us how you're using Linux in each and every aspect of your company, and also pay us these fines." Sorry, can't do that. From a court's perspective, their claim of plagiarism may or may not be valid -- their method for going about this is definitely invalid.
The coolest voice ever.
Red Hat Takes Aim at Infringement Claims
Complaint launched against SCO claims, Red Hat pledges $1MM to create fund to protect Linux
SAN FRANCISCO--August 4, 2003--Red Hat, Inc. (Nasdaq:RHAT) today made two significant announcements to protect Red Hat Linux customers and the worldwide Linux industry. First, Red Hat announced that it filed a formal complaint against The SCO Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: SCOX, "SCO"). The purpose of this complaint is to demonstrate that Red Hat's technologies do not infringe any intellectual property of SCO and to hold SCO accountable for its unfair and deceptive actions.
"We filed this complaint to stop SCO from making unsubstantiated and untrue public statements attacking Red Hat Linux and the integrity of the Open Source software development process," said Mark Webbink, General Counsel at Red Hat. "Red Hat is confident that its current and future customers will continue to realize the significant value that our Red Hat Linux platform provides without interruption."
To further protect the integrity of Open Source software and the Open Source community, Red Hat has established the Open Source Now Fund. The purpose of the fund will be to cover legal expenses associated with infringement claims brought against companies developing software under the GPL license and non-profit organizations supporting the efforts of companies developing software under a GPL license. Red Hat has pledged one million dollars to be provided as funding in this initiative. For more information please e-mail opensourcenow@redhat.com.
"The collaborative process of Open Source software development which created the Linux operating system has been unjustly questioned and threatened," said Matthew Szulik, Chairman and CEO of Red Hat. "In its role as industry leader, Red Hat has a responsibility to ensure the legal rights of users are protected."
About Red Hat, Inc.
Red Hat is the world's premier open source and Linux provider. Red Hat is headquartered in Raleigh, N.C. and has offices worldwide. Its European headquarters is based in Surrey, UK, with offices throughout Europe. Please visit Red Hat on the Web at www.redhat.com.
Forward-Looking Statements
Forward-looking statements in this press release are made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of Section 21E ofRed Hat Takes Aim at Infringement Claims
Complaint launched against SCO claims, Red Hat pledges $1MM to create fund to protect Linux
SAN FRANCISCO--August 4, 2003--Red Hat, Inc. (Nasdaq:RHAT) today made two significant announcements to protect Red Hat Linux customers and the worldwide Linux industry. First, Red Hat announced that it filed a formal complaint against The SCO Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: SCOX, "SCO"). The purpose of this complaint is to demonstrate that Red Hat's technologies do not infringe any intellectual property of SCO and to hold SCO accountable for its unfair and deceptive actions.
"We filed this complaint to stop SCO from making unsubstantiated and untrue public statements attacking Red Hat Linux and the integrity of the Open Source software development process," said Mark Webbink, General Counsel at Red Hat. "Red Hat is confident that its current and future customers will continue to realize the significant value that our Red Hat Linux platform provides without interruption."
To further protect the integrity of Open Source software and the Open Source community, Red Hat has established the Open Source Now Fund. The purpose of the fund will be to cover legal expenses associated with infringement claims brought against companies developing software under the GPL license and non-profit organizations supporting the efforts of companies developing software under a GPL license. Red Hat has pledged one million dollars to be provided as funding in this initiative. For more information please e-mail opensourcenow@redhat.com.
"The collaborative process of Open Source software development which created the Linux operating system has been unjustly questioned and threatened,"
We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked.
If wonder whether the OSNF (Open Source Now Fund) is a non-profit 501(c)(3) corporation? Should it be? If so, should Red Hat's contributions to it be tax deductible? While others will benefit from the fund, so of course will Red Hat.
Also, who will be administering the OSNF? Will they work for or be connected to Red Hat? Who will make the decisions regarding the disbursement of funds, etc.?
Only Women Bleed (Sex, Sharia remix)
They've thrown their HAT in the ring?
Sorry, had to say it.
Yahoo Finance reports that Red Hat has a market cap of 1.159 Billion, while SCO only has a 151.9 Million market cap.
While market capitalization does not tell the whole story, it does show that Red Hat is a much more financially powerful company.
With that and the fact that they almost certainly have a rock solid case, the fact is they should sue the shit out of SCO.
This is a SEPARATE issue from the "Open Source Now Fund". I havne't found a copy of the filing, but making unsubstantiated and untrue public statements about your competitors is a serious buiness law violation.
Does anybody else see this coming? Just as MS is secretly behind SCO, it's going to become clear that IBM is behind Red Hat. So, if I might make the Babylon 5 analogy...
The Shadows are Microsoft and IBM are the Vorlons, while the Centauri are SCO and the Alliance is Red Hat...
Each "First One" is trying to win their side of the war using the smaller races as the pawns in their larger game.
Don't fall for it Red Hat, you're just doing what they want you to do! You got to choose to stand on your own and kick MS and IBM directly.
Although, wouldn't it be great if the CEO of Red Hat shows up with a space ship and a 50megaton Nuke to blow a hole in Z'hadum (Redmond WA.)...
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
Hmmm, can we talk incessantly about this case instead? It certainly sounds like the courtroom scenes will be more eye-pleasing than anything we'll see in Red Hat vs. SCO.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
For a SWEET Publicity idea for SCO.
They and Metallica should get together an throw a "free benefit concert" for promoting "fair protections for intellectual property." They could send out mailers to their dwindelling fanbase, and invite critics to come too. And then just when the show is about to start Darl McBride and Lars could get in their matching gold plated limos and start running over the assembled crowd.
I'll admit to not being suprised by the existance of the two words in the same headline... it's the ordering that caught me off gaurd.
Life has many choices. Eternity has two. What's yours?
This is quite interesting, and should impact SCO considerably. By initiating this action, Red Hat can enter the "discovery" phase, which will allow the lawyers (and developers?) to see the ALL of the code that SCO says infringes on their intellectual property.
The end result should be that Red Hat will be able to wipe away the FUD, and get down to the bottom of what SCO really owns. Assuming SCO owns anything, Red Hat can then begin work on removing that code. Also, if Red Hat wins, they will probably get monetary damages, which always helps.
Go Red Hat!
(Now I suppose I should actually buy the distro instead of downloading the ISO's...)
-Mark
"To further protect the integrity of Open Source software and the Open Source community, Red Hat has established the Open Source Now Fund. The purpose of the fund will be to cover legal expenses associated with infringement claims brought against companies developing software under the GPL license"
I think the SCO suit is great for Redhat, but even better for the community is this legal fund. I don't know if it's non-profit, or how it works exactly, but ideally it would (and should) be a fund to help take care of any OSS-movement threatening lawsuits or legal issues. This is something Open Source has never had before, and that large corporations have always had. This may give OSS the support it needs to grow without threats from any company out to stop it -- like SCO. The way they describe it, it seems like something meant to be a "legal department" for Open Source.
It may just be me, but I think that's the bigger picture here.
"!"
The SCO case has already inspired the ire of the entire Linux community. It's even made Germany make SCO's claim completely null and void within its borders.
Considering that SCO is not doing well financially, is being countersued by IBM, and is still yet to provide concrete evidence, Red Hat might as well save its resources and stay out of this. Although it most certainly has a stake in the outcome of the argument, it's quite likely that their involvement will not bring about much change.
That said, I commend Red Hat for doing what they're doing and, at the very least, making explicit the sentiment in Linux community feels for SCO.
somebody stood up and said "Yea? Well so'z your ol' man."
The moment somebody didn't roll over and play dead, they were screwed. The whole thing will fall apart with SCO not being able to defend itself against a civil damages counter-suit. The Linux will probably will probably start a class action suit against SCO demanding trade-lost and punitive damages and it may come to criminal proceedings with SCO's CEO finhgting to stay out of "Club Fed."
Then SCO's share holders will want to hang him by his SCrOtum because SCO's client base will get offers to move over to Linux for free and share price will free-fall.
Want a prediction? SCO doesn't survive until X-Mass.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
Even better news:
SCOX
compare the time on the PR notice with the start of the downward spiral...
plonk!
RedHat has to be in this fight.
/.er. RedHat is the flag bearer for Linux right now. That can change if the Linux culture turns against it. If RedHat does not defend Linux, people will remember that fact for a long time.
RedHat speaks, lives, and breathes GNU. They understand the real issues at steak in this fight, while the team of lawyers at IBM are looking at the cost benefits of fighting vs. settling.
If SCO wins it's a disruption (big but not fatal) for IBM. It's a death nell for RedHat.
IBM may have the deep pockets, but if the ruling went against Big Blue they could always resort to options that leave Linux hanging in the wind. IBM has the resources to build a new operating system from scratch if need be.
And then there's the culture of OSS developers to consider. If RedHat doesn't throw down at some point, they will never be forgiven be the likes of the average
Red Hat may win. That would prove that it is illegal to talk bad about your competetor.
/. is in trouble. No one can post anything bad about them.
No, it would prove that it is illegal to make false claims about your competitor.
The Microsoft can sue anyone who uses a dollar sign in place of an s when referring to them.
No again.
Then
And a final no. This might help you.
I have to say this. I hate Red Hat. Not the people. The distribution. RPM. Their whole idiotic file layout. Their stupid configuration tools. I used it for awhile, and I really do hate it.
But I don't hate the people working for them - there are a lot of really good people there. And I don't hate the company. As a corporation, it does some pretty dumb things occasionally, sure. And the buzzwordspeak is annoying ('...continue to realize the significant value that our Red Hat Linux platform provides' - wtf are they trying to say and why don't they just say it?) but all companies, for some unintelligible reason, seem to do that. I was a bit peeved when they C&D'd linuxiso, I must admit, but that turned out to have been a simple mistake by some simpleton in the legal office and was quickly rectified.
In the end, even though their system disgusts me and I will never willingly use it again, they pay some damn fine hackers to work on damn fine Free software, and despite all the buzzwordspeak they do seem to know what they're talking about when they use the word community.
So RedHat is alright by me. They're not bad folks.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
Suse already got an injunction against them in Germany. German courts pretty much told them to shut the hell up unless they could back their allegations up, so they... shut the hell up. Not a peep out of them in Germany since.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
if they do, paypal will freeze their account for some unknown 'violation' and that money will never be seen again.
AT: The SCO Group, Inc. Third-Quarter Financial Results Conference Call WHEN: Thursday, August 14, 2003, 9:00 a.m. Mountain Daylight Time. HOW: If you would like to participate in the live call, you may dial 1.800.811.0667 or 1.913.981.4901; Passcode: 452322. You may also join the call in listen-only mode via Web cast. The URL is listed at http://ir.sco.com/medialist.cfm .
The actual complaint, not linked from the story, can be found here.
What the hell are you talking about?
/etc/issue, anyway.
* up2date surveys/support cuts for old releases
So what if Redhat doesn't support old releases. Use up2date and your machine will be updated to new releases automatically. The only difference between releases is
* mp3
Patent issues. I doubt Fraunhofer will allow Redhat to license the mp3 formats for GPLed software (for obvious reasons).
* exiting the boxed set market
Last version of redhat I downloaded via BitTorrent. It went pretty smooth. It was the first set of isos I've downloaded off the internet and it was slick. I won't ever buy a boxed set again!
* no reiserfs/xfs
For reiserfs, install with "linux reiserfs". XFS? Who uses that anyway?
I wonder if the primary purpose of the new fund would be to finance a class action suit by kernel developers against SCO for GPL violations? Think of it - Many individual developers could not afford to bring suit on their own against SCO, but they could if they were part of a class action suit funded by RedHat.
The wording is kind of vague, but that is what the announcement implies to me.An ounce of perception is worth a pound of obscure
It is about time some company/someone did something serious about this. IBM's just standing there, unmovable, almost playing with SCO, whose efforts to attack them are like water off a duck's back. It's a bit like a cat playing with a mouse before it eats it. And after Novell's rather brief and quickly-dismissed effort, we have been left wondering, to an extent...
:)
And of course, the users who matter, businesses - at least some of them - have been getting scared shitless by the threat of litigation. In these uncertain economic times, who can blame them? Slashdotters may see through SCO's FUD, but we are rather a fringe group in society as a whole, and the average Pointy-Haired just sees "Lawsuit!" and thinks "Run."
Whether this be IBM-funded or a wholly Red Hat initiated effort (although the former seems far more likely, given the relationship between the two companies), it is much needed. Although the SCO FUD seems to have lessened somewhat in the past few days (I'm using that good ole indicator of Number of Slashdot Stories), the damage has been not inconsiderable.
And then the Open Source Now Fund - such a wonderful response to Microsoft's undertaking to underwrite any legal costs incurred by their customers as a result of similar disputes. The community was, I think, left reeling somewhat as to this rather clever attack on open source, an attack which exploited its distributed nature of development and limited accountability. Once again, a solution has been found. (I suppose, perhaps, Michael Robertson might have done something otherwise...)
Let's hope this whole mess is resolved reasonably quickly now. To be frank, questions ought to be asked of a country/legal system where a company can get away with such shocking behaviour for so long, but that, maybe, is for the aftermath...
iqu
Consequently, FedEx has been talking to HP about buying the software through them rather than RedHat.
I'm sure that there are other instances of Redhat's getting hurt by all of the garbage SCO is spewing. I would guess that at least one reason they're doing this is they can't afford to wait any longer for someone else (IBM) to.
If you look at the competitive space where Linux is growing up, you see two kinds of companies striving for business.
One kind of company sees the writing on wall. These companies realize what FLOSS is, and have redefined themselves under this new reality. These companies are usually content to compete on a level playing field in this respect. They are all trying to incorporate Linux and Open Source into their business, with various degrees of success. Most companies fit into this group: IBM, Novell, Oracle, SGI, Dell, etc.
The other kind of company will settle for no less than complete domination of the market on their own terms: Sun and Microsoft. Sun is interesting because it wants to play both sides of the fence, but I gather they would rather NOT share in the Linux goodness with their competitors if they can help it.
Microsoft will sit and deny that Linux is even viable until they are completely engulfed by it. Witness the Internet.
These enemies of Linux and Free/Open Source have discovered their anti-Linux efforts to be futile. According to leaked Microsoft documents, smear campaigns were in fact counter-productive. The interesting conclusion was that the best attack on Linux was a legal attack. Apparently Microsoft's market research shows that fear of being sued is the biggest deterrent to Linux deployments.
So this is their trump card. If they can stir up fear of litigation, they can point at Linux and say, "Look, no indemnification there! Buy us instead." SCO is just a pawn in this gambit - I don't think anyone expects them to survive the play.
By providing a legal fund to developers of GPL software, Red Hat begins to undermine these tactics used by Microsoft and Sun.
I like this fund because it appears to benefit the community as a whole and not just Red Hat customers. I sincerely hope that other companies pick up on this idea, and decide to contribute to the fund.
If anything, this gives us an idea of how we can provide indemnification to Linux users in general. Perhaps a general fund for all Linux _users_ would be appropriate, with the option to purchase a renewable policy against it (from a community run non-profit group). The community could evaluate claims against this "insurance" and assign legal resources to litigate it if needed. At any rate, owning a policy would guarantee a level of financial coverage. Non-policy owners could also get help, depending on circumstances and the merits of their case.
I see this as a way for the politicaly motivated community members to contribute where they might not be able to give code.
...and that's a pity, because, again, that's the side were the money is made.
Forgive me if this is up here somewhere already, but I ran a search through the replies and didn't see it. This is SCO's amusing response, lifted off Yahoo's biz section - I would imagine this would actually be admissible as evidence of some of Red Hat's claims! (Particularly regarding the last two sentences.)
Matthew J. Szulik
CEO
RED HAT, INC.
1801 Varsity Drive
Raleigh, NC 27606
Dear Matthew,
Attached is the letter I discussed with you during our July 31, 2003 telephone conversation. Instead of actually sending the letter, I thought it was best to telephone you and speak in person to see if we could resolve the issues between our companies short of litigation. We left the conversation with a preliminary agreement to meet and continue our discussions further.
To my surprise, I just discovered that your company filed legal action against The SCO Group earlier today. You, of course, mentioned nothing of this during our telephone conversation. I am disappointed that you were not more forthcoming about your intentions. I am also disappointed that you have chosen litigation rather than good faith discussions with SCO about the problems inherent in Linux.
Of course, we will prepare our legal response as required by your complaint. Be advised that our response will likely include counterclaims for copyright infringement and conspiracy.
I must say that your decision to file legal action does not seem conducive to the long-term survivability of Linux.
Yours truly
Darl C. McBride
President & CEO
"SCO did not respond to Red Hat's letter {requesting that SCO explain the bases for its allegations regarding Linux}, except to make a telephone call seeking to have Red Hat pay for an unneeded UNIX license."
Darl: Hi, is Matt around?
Operator: Matt who?
Darl: Umm, I'm not real sure how to pronounce it... Matt, uh, SSS-Zulick?
Operator: Hold on...
(telephone ringing)
Darl: Chris, can you believe these fuckers are suing us?
Chris Sontag: Well, you know, once we get into court and show them what we showed the analysts under DNA-
Darl: Chris, you're an idiot. Shut up.
Female Voice: Hello, you've reached the office of Matthew Szulick. How can I help you?
Darl: Uh, yeah, is Matt in?
Matt's Admin. Asst.: I'm not sure. I can check for you. May I ask who's calling?
Darl: Yeah, this is, uh, Darl McBride. From SCO?
Admin: Please hold.
(Muzak)
Darl: Chris, I'm gonna put this on speaker for a moment.
(pause)
Isn't that the IBM corporate song?
Chris: No... I don't think so. It's "Raindrops Keep Falling On My Head", isn't it?
Male Voice: Matt here.
Darl: (fumbles with speakerphone switch) Hey, Matt, how are you? It's Darl McBride here, from SCO.
Matt: Yeah, Darl, what do you want?
Darl: Look we got your letter here...
Matt: Uh huh
Darl:
Matt: What did you have in mind?
Darl: Well, I've got this Unix license I could sell you real cheap, just between friends, I mean, hey, we're both CEO's here...
(click)
Darl: Matt? Matt, are you still there?
SCO System V for Linux
Uh... I just ran into this while browsing SCO's site. It seems to contain more vague threats and accusations, to the tune of "everyone using Unix apps under Linux has pirated SCO's libraries."
Does anyone know what this is about?
My bicyles
Kudos to Redhat for doing what the FSF should have already done. Now's the time to give money to Redhat or you may end up giving money to SCO instead. After years of free Linux use, I'm inclined to donate for it's future.