Slashdot Mirror
SCO "Disappointed" by Red Hat Lawsuit
schmidt349 writes "SCO has issued a preliminary response to Red Hat's lawsuit, in which President and CEO Darl McBride advises that SCO will prepare a "legal response" to Red Hat's requests for injunctive relief. In addition, he promises that the countersuit that SCO will file may include "counterclaims for copyright infringement and conspiracy." His final statement-- that Red Hat's "decision to file legal action does not seem conducive to the long-term survivability of Linux--" is chilling in light of the business strategy that SCO has adopted in its sales of UnixWare licenses to actual and potential users of the Linux kernel."
Hi Darl, you fascist, I run Linux on a dozen boxes. Please send me a bill that I will be happy to wipe my ass with and send back to you.
What an arrogant little prick.
"I am also disappointed that you have chosen litigation rather than good faith discussions with SCO about the problems inherent in Linux." - Darl McBride
This guy oughtta write for Letterman!
Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
Today RedHat is
a) Good
b) Bad
c) CowboyNeal
We have been showing a portion of this code since early June.
Um...no you haven't. Nobody has seen this comparison but Darl McBride and his evil twin brother.
SCO's "Disappointed"? Awe poor SCO.
Well SCO, I'm very disappointed in YOU!
Now go to your room and don't come out until you've thought about what you've done.
See the Pictures of the Flood of '08
"How dare you counter our frivolous claims with an honest-to-goodness lawsuit based on real facts!?!?!"
We at the SCO are disappointed you did not roll over and die when we used the word lawyers.
We are awaiting further instruction from out legal team, however this may be delayed as our current course of action provided by our lawyers lists only the phrase "2. ???" for our next step. We are awaiting clarification from them before continuing.
There are some people that if they don't know, you can't tell 'em.
Dear SCO,
Get used to disappointment. There's a lot more on the way.
I liked Red Hat's letter to SCO. So much that it leaves me wondering what would happen if every Linux user coordinated sending a copy with their demands to SCO on the same day. We could all demand responses.
Instead of supporting their FUD campaign with license fees, we could create cost by forcing them to deal with a mountain of letters. Make sure you send it registered/certified so that someone has to sign for it.
Just picture the tractor trailer backing up full of letters...
I used to wonder what was so holy about a silent night, now I have a child.
McBride's reality checker is broken. We tried to send him replacement parts, but he keeps sending them back to us with a note saying that he doesn't need reality since he owns Unix. Poor bastard...
US Democracy:The best person for the job (among These pre-selected choices...)
Saddam Hussein "Disappointed" by U.S. liberation of Iraq....news at 11!
Well said.
Essentially, SCO's letter could alternately be read, "Waah! No fair! I'm the only one who can do that! You're not playing nice. I want my mom!"
Go Red Hat. I hope they tie up SCO in court for a nice long time and win their case. SCO seems to be playing the intimidation game and is being very smug -- the tune will change if they get a slap in the face in court. Too bad only Red Hat has had the nads to fight back up to this point.
Be excellent to each other. And... PARTY ON, DUDES!
I was going to post the text of the article, but then I decided against it ... I would prefer to just let them get slashdotted ;-)
That's nothing - he can do that with both of his faces as well.
++ Say to Elrond "Hello.".
Elrond says "No.". Elrond gives you some lunch.
What SCO said, and what they really meant
SCO has consistently stated that our UNIX System V source code and derivative UNIX code have been misappropriated into Linux 2.4 and 2.5 kernels
We just want to scare you into paying us money. Thats easier than actually producing a product that anyone wants.
We have been educating end users on the risks of running an operating system that is an unauthorized derivative of UNIX.
We have been trying to extort money from you.
SCO's claims are true and we look forward to proving them in court.
If we can get you to give us money, then we don't really have to prove anything. Our lawyers told us that.
Recent correspondence from SCO to Red Hat further explains SCO's position
Holy SH*T someone is calling our bluff, what? They have lawyers? Suing WHO? I can't belive it, threatenting to sue is the way to do business, can't we grease your palm with some of our liscence fee to make this go away?
"Science is about ego as much as it is about discovery and truth " - I said it, so sue me.
SCO Sues you!
No wait, we did that already
Is NIL. SCO does not have a legal team. For some time now the company HAS become a law practicing firm. So the RedHat suit comes just like getting a new client.
1. No sig. 2. ???? 3. Profit!!!
Is that too contrived?
oh wait, you mean where the IBM lawyers don't laugh in their faces and tell them to GFY. No, I don't think that happened somehow.
What's even worse, is that you'd never know if they actually had them or not. Their story keeps changing.
First they say that they discovered stolen code in December ... no wait, it was March, wait... I think it was January. They said they decided to take legal action when we saw a presentation by IBM people saying that Unix was irrelevant .. no wait .. they decided when they did a code audit .. wait ... when they spoke with some Linux hacker in Keokuk Iowa .. yeh - that's it. Because of course, there is 80 lines of stolen code .. no wait... a couple hundred lines of code .. no, now they have discovered thousands of lines in hundreds of files. That's it. That's the ticket.
They're suing IBM for breach of contract - but don't worry Linux users. Wait, then they thought should sue Linus Torvalds too. They claim he didn't answer their emails about it .. but wait, then they said that they had spoken to him about it in December.
Now they want to go after *all* Linux users .. but wait.. if you buy a license, we won't touch you.
As I said, they may have decided to have good faith discussions with IBM, or Santa Claus, or whovever .. you'd never know it.
I've been swashdotted -- Elmer Fudd
Problem is he DOESN'T want to go to court.
:D
"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."
Oh and here is something amusing.
" 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."
Not more forthcoming? Isn't this SCO's entire business strategy for 2003-2004?
"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."
Conspiracy? Is this guy off his medication again? Ye Gods! I believe this guy is gunning for the idiot of the year award. Before year end he will be more popular than my favorite idiot. The Iraqi Information Minister
Has Comcast disconnected your Internet account? Same here. You can read about it at http://comcastissue.blogspot.com
long int infinity = 32768;
/
for (i=0,i<=inifinity,++i){
Sue();
GetCountersued();
CountersueCountersuer();
}
Profit!
I leave it to you to work out all the bugs for SCO and upload the source via CVS to the following ftp server: ftp://ftp.scogroup.com/evilbits/code/profitengine
Thanks!
Here's a suggestion that I am proposing for Darl McBride, which he is free to use without paying royalties to myself:
I would pay good money for that!Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
I suppose the question is "are you paranoid if everyone is out to get you BECAUSE you annoyed them all."
"The Sage treasures Unity and measures all things by it" - Lao Tzu
IBM has maintained a consistent position of "Oh come on. Will you fucking assholes get real?" for the entire affair.
I count this to their eternal credit. They know who's the David and who's the Goliath as well, so they're not even really taking much of a chance. The worst-case is that they just revive AIX.
Cretin - a powerful and flexible CD reencoder
pretty much as i recall too.
SCO: "you broke our contract, give us a bag full of cash, lots of bags full o' cash"
IBM: "you're freaking nuts, enjoy your stock inflation while it lasts, now get the hell outta my face, i've got products to sell!
Slashdot Crowd: hahahahaha!!! roflmmfao!!! hahahahah! rolfmmfao!!!
"Linux geeks howled a bit, but then wrote off SCO as a bunch of sleazebags and went back to playing live-action roleplaying (LARP) games in their mothers' basements, or whatever it is they do when they're not writing device drivers and complaining about clueless end users."
No surprise to me, though; I'm surprised that SCO is surprised.
Well, no surprise, but I'm surprised that you're suprised that SCO is surprised.
I'm just... surprised.
>>"I am also disappointed that you have chosen
>>litigation rather than good faith discussions
>>with SCO about the problems inherent in
>>Linux."
Kettle? Hi Kettle....
Wake up Kettle, we have someone for you to meet.
This is Pot. Say hi to pot.
I wish they'd just yelled and grounded me. Their being disappointed just makes me feel so much sorrier...
This man is talking out his ass.
.. we might have a new candidate for Governor of California.
Hey
-- Knowing too much can get you killed, but knowing who knows too much can make you rich.
I am also disappointed that you have chosen litigation rather than good faith discussions with SCO about the problems inherent in Linux
So, Darth McBride finds their lack of good faith discussions disturbing?
The moment they state the file or day, can't you just go look up the good ol' CVS for that day, and see who put it in there?.. I could think of nothing funnier in court than:
....
Monday:
Judge: Please state the files, lines, etc that are in question.
Sco: File xyz.c lines abc.c
Judge: This could be incrimenating, yes.
Tuesday:
Judge: Linux Distro X, do you have anything to say before we proceed?
Penguin: Only that we clean-roomed the files in question and rebuilt the kernel last night while you were sleeping. Any code SCO might lay claim to is no longer an issue.. We had offered to remove the offending material, but SCO never told us where it was... it is now gone. At the courts disgression, we can also remove the source logs of the offending files
meh
Somebody needs to call up RIAA and convince them of the following:
1) All their copyright infringers are using Linux
2) Linux is apparently the same as SCO
3) Thus, the root of all their problems is SCO.
Lock RIAA and SCO up in the same room and let them fight each other. Now that would be a reality show worth watching.
I so much agree with you. Just every bit of linux distributor/user all over the world should sue SCO. Right now.
In no time they'll be out of business.
Wait a minute, would that be called a Legal DDoS? Same idea right?
Write boring code, not shiny code!
He has altered the license. Pray that he does not alter it any further.
... for some message to pop up somewhere, with some guy going
... I dunno. Is this guy more or less priceless than al-Sahaf? ...
"OH GOD! YES! I DID IT! I COPIED V5 SOURCE CODE INTO THE LINUX KERNEL.
I'M SO SORRY! THE PRESSURE! I COULDN'T TAKE IT ANYMORE! AAAARGH! *sob*"
Whereupon we can all go "you know - you're a dick" and buy him a beer. Then everyone cleans up after him.
As to Dee McBride
Dude - *you're* disappointed? Well let me tell you how *we* feel
yes, we have no bananas
I think that SCO is already intimately familiar with "pot".
Technoli
So SCO wants to make a counter suite to Redhat's counter suite to SCOs suing of all Linux users? Maybe we can get some kind of recursive counter suing going on so all known lawyers get tied up into one case. Then life in the US can go back to normal.
Outdoor digital photography, mostly in New Engl
No, no...
.
Pot makes you sit around and eat chips all day.
SCO is on crack
*******
This is your brain. [Insert picture of a computer running Linux.]
This is your brain on crack. [Insert picture of computer running SCO Unixware.]
Any questions?
I like you, Stuart. You're not like everyone else, here, at Slashdot.
It's too bad SCO has already distributed Linux 2.4.x under the GPL. Thanks, SCO, for delegitimizing your own claims.
They even specifically mention SMP improvements. Isn't their claim to copyright infringement against Linux 2.4's SMP code? So they can jump on the Linux bandwagon, say, "Hey, we've got improved SMP scalability, and we're distributing it under the GPL (because we have to)!", then jump off when their business fails and sue everybody for code they themselves distributed under the GPL?
I browsed through their RPM archives on their FTP. They've removed all the kernel RPMs and SRPMs. Oh well.
Fuck SCO. I hope they crash and burn.
-=/\- Jizzbug -/\=-
No. We already found the right man for the job.
... and then they said the infringing code was not in the kernel but in the periphery.. no wait... there is infringing code everywhere in the kernel, that one is a no-brainer. Then they decided that IBM had stollen their copyrighted code and given it to Linux.. no wait... it is not about copyright.., but wait... they cannot reveal the code because it will be taken out.. no wait... there is so much code that linux will be nothing if it is taken out and besides its about trade secrets and not copyright.. but wait we'll sue Linux users for copyright anyway.
Talk about good faith... hah!
"Fighting terrorists with millitary might is like killing a mosquitor on your Dad's forehead with a rifle."
Whenever someone starts bandying about that "there is a conspiracy against them" is is usually a proof-positive sign that they are suffering from from mental illness... that is unless everyone else really *is* out to get them. Oh wait... :-)
Dear Mr. "CmdrTaco" Malda and other Slashdot editors:
I appreciated the link in the story to the SCO. It is always best to get the story straight from the horse's mouth. Or, in the case of SCO, the other end of the horse. However, would it be too much trouble to put a "goatse.cx" disclaimer on further links to SCO's website? They are clearly too closely related for my comfort.
On another issue, I understand that there has been conversation regarding changing the SCO icon from it's current Mickey Mouse looking thing to something resembling the goatse.cx picture. I, for one, cast a whole-hearted "no" vote on that potential change. I think that the current Mickey Mouse looking icon accurately reflects the nature of SCO's enterprise and that the proposed alteration might be traumatic for the younger readers of this "family" website.
Thank you for your consideration.
Respectfully,
guacamolefoo
Lots of petrified grits
I now present the following bits of source code that SCO has on display...
;
}
}
;
}
This sig no verb.
then it won't be long before the Linux community re-writes those parts that IBM contributed
I have seen the light now...this is the very reason why SCO won't release the infringing code. To do so would gut whatever claims they have against Linux. This really isn't about protecting proprietary property. It's about milking a cash cow for all its worth before it wanders away to greener pastures.
Fuck you and the source you rode in on,
Attached is the letter I discussed with you during our July 31, 2003 telephone conversation.
I am attaching a letter for your review.
Instead of actually sending the letter, I thought it was best to telephone you and speak in person
We didn't have enough in the petty cash drawer to buy a stamp, but I got this really good deal on long-distance calls, so...
to see if we could resolve the issues between our companies short of litigation.
PLEASE DON'T HURT US!
We left the conversation with a preliminary agreement to meet and continue our discussions further.
You're buying this round, I'm broke.
To my surprise, I just discovered that your company filed legal action against The SCO Group earlier today.
Et tu, Matthew?
You, of course, mentioned nothing of this during our telephone conversation.
You're a sneaky bastard and I'm proud of you, son.
I am disappointed that you were not more forthcoming about your intentions.
*sniffle*
I am also disappointed that you have chosen litigation rather than good faith discussions with SCO about the problems inherent in Linux.
You talking to me?
Of course, we will prepare our legal response as required by your complaint.
/me is opening a can of legal whupass. Oops, it's way past the expiry date...
Be advised that our response will likely include counterclaims for copyright infringement and conspiracy.
We're gonna get medeival on your ass.
I must say that your decision to file legal action does not seem conducive to the long-term survivability of Linux.
insert boilerplate_empty_threat.c
Yours truly
Fuck off
Darl C. McBride
Darl "My sandbox was full of cement" McBribe
President & CEO
Chief Entertainment Officer, The Up the Creek Correctional Facility LLC
Money for nothing, pix for free
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
The following really jumped out at me:
I must say that your decision to file legal action does not seem
conducive to the long-term survivability of Linux.
What Darl meant to say was:
"I must say that our decision to file legal action (against IBM) does not seem conducive to the long-term survivability of SCO."
Yes, but I am still puzzled how he does that with Microsoft's hand up there...
Acts of massive stupidity are almost never covered by warranty. --me.
Anyone think the news today about BG selling 1,000,000 shares of MS stock for about $26 dollars apiece has signficance?
Daryl: OMG! Bill, RedHat is suing us! All our plans are fucked!
Bill: I've grasped that, Daryl. All I'm doin' is contemplating the "ifs."
Daryl: I don't wanna hear about no motherfuckin' ifs. All I wanna hear from yo' ass is, "You ain't got no problem, Daryl. I'm on the motherfucker. Go back in there, chill them niggers out and wait for the calvary which should be coming directly."
Bill: You ain't got no problem Daryl. I'm on the motherfucker. Go back in there, chill them niggers out and wait for the Wolf who should be coming directly.
I'm reminded of a message I once saw to the old Mac EvangeList:
"In future postings, please replace the word 'analyst' with the word 'chimpanzee'."
Naked.
"RedHat, I'm disappointed in ya. What are yaz do'in on my turf? If you're not careful, I'll have da boys ruff ya up."
Of course, he can threaten RedHat like this because the two 'gangs' are roughly the same size... But IBM is standing over in the shadows behind RedHat.
Darl needs psychiatric help and someone should should get his HBO shut off to help him come out of his fantasy world.
Ahem. National Bunghole Anti-Defamation Leage on Line Two.
Peer Review: (to be confidential inside SCO under standard NDA)
This business plan has several problems:
- The function sue() cannot be proven to ever return (see ACM literature re. "Halting Problem"), meaning any suit could effectively last forever.
- The function sue() is self-recursive, meaning it could consume all resources available to the machine.
- The counterSue() signal handler is poorly implemented and introduces a vulnerability whereby a countersuit DoS attack may be initiated upon Business Plan v2.0; countersuits launched while Business Plan v2.0 is launching a response to another countersuit may go unnoticed, and as such the countersuing vendor would win due to lack of action by the software.
- The main() function targets all vendors without attempting to verify if the overhead of calling sue() is justified, nor attempting to execute lawsuits in an optimal order.
- No attempt is made to limit the resources consumed (threads spawned) during the counterSue() signal handler; as such, a large number of long-lasting countersuits (again, none of which can be proven to terminate due to the Halting Problem) may use up sufficient resources to prevent the lawsuit loop in main() from initiating new suits, or indeed crash the application program.
- The algorithm chosen for sue() has proven only to work once in a specific case (caldera, microsoft); the general case has been proven neither experimentally nor formally. Furthermore, sue(caledera, microsoft) was selected as the test case for this algorithm because it was a trivial example, and the consultCEO() subroutine was significantly more optimized at the time.
(pardon the formatting, I don't think it's *possible* to nicely indent code onDo daemons dream of electric sleep()?
ask and ye shall receive
golf party
Schrodinger's cat is either dead or really pissed off...
/* @(#)COPYRIGHT 8.2 (Berkeley) 3/21/94
.Lic ense.Change and is
All of the documentation and software included in the 4.4BSD and 4.4BSD-Lite
Releases is copyrighted by The Regents of the University of California.
Copyright 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994
The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved.
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions
are met:
1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software
must display the following acknowledgement:
This product includes software developed by the University of
California, Berkeley and its contributors.
4. Neither the name of the University nor the names of its contributors
may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software
without specific prior written permission.
THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE REGENTS AND CONTRIBUTORS ``AS IS'' AND
ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE
IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE
ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE REGENTS OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE
FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL
DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS
OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION)
HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT
LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY
OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF
SUCH DAMAGE.
The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers and the American
National Standards Committee X3, on Information Processing Systems have
given us permission to reprint portions of their documentation.
In the following statement, the phrase ``this text'' refers to portions
of the system documentation.
Portions of this text are reprinted and reproduced in electronic form in
the second BSD Networking Software Release, from IEEE Std 1003.1-1988, IEEE
Standard Portable Operating System Interface for Computer Environments
(POSIX), copyright C 1988 by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics
Engineers, Inc. In the event of any discrepancy between these versions
and the original IEEE Standard, the original IEEE Standard is the referee
document.
In the following statement, the phrase ``This material'' refers to portions
of the system documentation.
This material is reproduced with permission from American National
Standards Committee X3, on Information Processing Systems. Computer and
Business Equipment Manufacturers Association (CBEMA), 311 First St., NW,
Suite 500, Washington, DC 20001-2178. The developmental work of
Programming Language C was completed by the X3J11 Technical Committee.
The views and conclusions contained in the software and documentation are
those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing official
policies, either expressed or implied, of the Regents of the University
of California.
NOTE: The copyright of UC Berkeley's Berkeley Software Distribution ("BSD")
source has been updated. The copyright addendum may be found at
ftp://ftp.cs.berkeley.edu/pub/4bsd/README.Impt
included below.
July 22, 1999
To All Licensees, Distributors of Any Version of BSD:
As you know, certain of the Berkeley Software Distribution ("BSD") source
code files requir
but it is illogical to say that because someone has different preferences for a distro than yours, that person becomes unqualified to judge operating systems.
:-)
For instance, *clearly* Linus Torvalds doesn't know jack about operating systems because he doesn't use a microkernel-based approach.
May we never see th
Well it's a picture of one. There's no date on it. At one point, sysadmins used SCO Unixware on their computers. It could be from an archive somewhere.
May we never see th
I am sure you meant DDO$ right? (distrubuted denial of dollars)
DO NOT LEAVE IT IS NOT REAL