Slashdot Mirror
SCO Calls IBM Countersuit "Unsubstantiated Allegations"
dacarr writes "Yahoo currently hosts a press release from SCO that basically calls for IBM to "move away from the GPL"." Lycoris tries to dodge the flood of idiocy from Utah. Another non-programmer has seen SCO's presentation, and without attempting to verify the facts through his own research, reported on it. One reader buys a SCO license. SCO justifies their continuing illegal distribution of the Linux kernel.
"Regarding Patent Accusations
SCO has shipped these products for many years, in some cases for nearly two decades, and this is the first time that IBM has ever raised an issue about patent infringement in these products."
IANAPA (Patent attorney), but as I understand it, the holder of patent can choose when to enfornce the patent. "Because we have been" is NOT a legal argument.
Holy s-, it's Jesus!
Grocklaw has an overview of the IBM countersuit. And for added fun, the whole 46 page filing is available in multipage TIFF or pdf.
T O1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm &r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=4,814,746.WKU.&OS=PN/4,814,746&RS =PN/4,814,746 T O1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm &r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=4,821,211.WKU.&OS=PN/4,821,211&RS =PN/4,821,211 T O1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm &r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=4,953,209.WKU.&OS=PN/4,953,209&RS =PN/4,953,209 T O1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm &r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=5,805,785.WKU.&OS=PN/5,805,785&RS =PN/5,805,785
The patents are at:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=P
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=P
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=P
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=P
After reading the actual countersuit filing, it looks like an even bigger, more comprehensive smackdown than even was speculated yesterday. IBM is fully ready to press SCO's GPL transgressions, talks at length about the failure of SCO's business, makes clear in several locactions the difference between Old SCO (Tarantella) and Caldera/New SCO, they even mention that some of SCO's claims have exceeded the statute of limitations. IBM has clearly been tracking SCO FUD and mentions specific quotes from SCO execs that are damaging. They also reiterate that IBM's UNIX license is perpetual and irrevokable, but they also say that even if that wern't the case SCO still can't revoke IBM's license because SCO has not followed the agreement on the procedure to revoke the license. SMACK, SMACK, SMACK!
the no
This has really became the Nerd version of the OJ trial.
I see this guy has already been modded Flamebait, but he is so right about this. What's really messed up though, is how ONLY people who read slashdot seem to know anything about it. I'm serious - I've tried to bring up SCO's situation a couple of times and no one knows what the hell I'm talking about. Even other programmers where I work have no clue that anything has happened at all.
This shit is trouble, mark my words. The guys at the top of companies don't read slashdot either - keep that in mind. I guarantee you that large companies that use Linux are pissing their fucking pants over this thing right now, considering the fact that the execs are going to have no fundamental grasp of the reality of the situation.
2.4.19. They're claiming 2.4.18 and later is infringeing.
/pub/scolinux/server/4.0/updates/SRPMS/ ...rver/4.0/updates/SRPMS > ls kern*e rnel-source-2.4.19.SuSE-133.nosrc.rpmr ce-2.4.19.SuSE-152.nosrc.rpm9 .SuSE-82.nosrc.rpm ...rver/4.0/updates/SRPMS >
NcFTP 3.1.5 (Oct 13, 2002) by Mike Gleason (ncftp@ncftp.com).
ncftp> o ftp.sco.com
Connecting to 216.250.140.126...
ftp.caldera.com Ready.
Logging in...
Welcome to SCO's FTP site!
This site hosts UNIX software patches, device drivers and supplements
from SCO.
To access Skunkware and Supplemental Open Source Packages, please
connect to ftp2.caldera.com.
** Please read the following export notice **
Please note that the electronic transfer of this data to a destination
outside of the United States constitutes an export (as defined by the
U.S. Bureau of Export Administration) and is authorized ONLY to the end
user. Any subsequent re-exportation of this data requires that the end
user obtain an additional export license. Also note that it is illegal
to re-route Caldera product to Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea,
Sudan or Syria and that you must file a special license if you intend
to re-route goods to the embargoed regions of Serbia or the Taliban
controlled areas of Afghanistan. Placement of this order constitutes
an agreement to comply with these stipulations.
Anonymous access granted, restrictions apply.
Logged in to ftp.sco.com.
ncftp / > cd
ncftp
kernel-source-2.4.19.SuSE-106.nosrc.rpm
k
kernel-sou
kernel-source-2.4.1
ncftp
Which means that regardless of whether or not "SCO feels that the GPL is too weak to stand up in court," is moot. They have accepted and continue to accept it's terms by having this Linux kernel source code on their FTP server.
Any code in kernel 2.4.19 that is 'infringing' is actuall not, because SCO knows about so-called 'infringing' code in there, yet they continue to distribute it, meaning they have effectively GPLed whatever code is in there, regardless of who actually put it in there (most likely, according to various sources, a Caldera employee!)
My journal has hot
Even if they do show that the GPL is unenforcable and their code is in the kernel, that would mean that they have no rights to any of Linux except their code. Everything else would go back to "all rights reserved" and they would not be able to license the whole shebang. Just their lines.
Yahoo's SCO Page has the money SCO execs have made by pumping the share price and setting automatic sell limits. When you consider how low the stock was its amazing that they put limits of $12 or more for a sell.
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
Trying to be factual, eh troll boy? Real Email address, and the company you work for would be credible. But what gave you away as a troll is your own words:
what about your earlier response? The one you posted in the "Linux annoyances" article?
I quote:
Linus blatantly stole our IP and is, in essence, trying to distribute a warezed version of our UnixWare.
By the time this book is in print, you're biggest annoyance will be the thick black cock in your asses, as we'll see your entire IP theft ring behind bars.
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo! http://goo.gl/J9bkO
No, they have said that Caldera OpenLinux users have a license for "their IP". But ONLY for use in purchased copies of OpenLinux. So you can't transfer it to Red Hat.
A quote from one of the articles:
Stowell admitted that his company was still providing Linux source code and security patches on its Web site in order to fulfill support contracts with customers, but he disputed Kuhn's claim. "If our IP [intellectual property] is being found in Linux and that's being done without our say, then I don't think that the GPL can force us not to collect license fees from someone who may be using our intellectual property," he said.
Um, yes it can. The GPL explicitly says so.
7. If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent infringement or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues),
conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the Program at all. For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Program.
Jay (=
(Who is to say that Caldera-now-SCO didn't authorize it? Wasn't Ransom Love and his whole crew basically forced out in favor of the current Chief Sleazebag Officer and his ilk? I wonder what Love has to say about all of this; I smell an interview opportunity...)
Umm AIX is being moved toward working better with Linux over the network, but it's not being phased out anytime soon. There are two other OS IBM won't be abandoning anytime soon either - z/OS and OS/390. That's the big iron stuff. AIX is mostly for the minis these days. Linux is for the micros.
They are putting a lot of work into making sure everything plays nicely together, but they are certainly NOT going towards using Linux exclusively.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
Ah, ah, ah! But the GPL isn't a *use* license, it's a *redistribution* license. The developers gave it to you to use for free, with all the rights that copyright law doesn't prohibit; they then additionally offered you a chance to redistribute it if you comply with the GPL.
If the GPL goes away, you still have the free ability to use the software -- but no ability to redistribute the product or create derivative works.