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.

Comments

-1 troll

[Sanity]

If I didn't know better I would say that this entire press release is a troll - and a pretty unconvincing troll at that:

We view IBM's counterclaim filing today as an effort to distract attention from its flawed Linux business model.

Flawed business model? Relative to what - SCO's ingenious strategy of using rediculous claims of IP infringement to pump and dump their shares while refusing to publicly disclose what the IP infringement actually is? Yup - SCO knows all about flawed business models.

If IBM were serious about addressing the real problems with Linux, it would offer full customer indemnification and move away from the GPL license.

Guh?! Since when is the GPL license the problem - even if SCO's claims did prove to be true? And how exactly does IBM "move away" from the software license under which their primary operating system is distributed?

As the stakes continue to rise in the Linux battles, it becomes increasingly clear that the core issue is bigger than SCO (Nasdaq: SCOX - News), Red Hat, or even IBM

What - that a company can get away with lying about Linux in order to pump up their share price? Yeah, that is a problem that is bigger than SCO, Red Hat, and IBM, but perhaps they won't get away with it after all.

The core issue is about the value of intellectual property in an Internet age.

Would this be the same Internet that largely relies on Free Software?

In a strange alliance, IBM and the Free Software Foundation have lined up on the same side of this argument in support of the GPL.

Normally when different groups line up on the same side of an issue it suggests that there is something to it.

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.

And how long was SCO shipping Linux without raising an issue about IP infringement?

These guys have some serious nerve - I hope they get put behind bars for this crap.

Re:-1 troll

[andrewl6097]

Flawed business model? Relative to what - SCO's ingenious strategy of using rediculous claims of IP infringement to pump and dump their shares while refusing to publicly disclose what the IP infringement actually is? Yup - SCO knows all about flawed business models.

By definition, this isn't a flawed business model. SCO is making incredible amounts of cash. It's unethical, but since when did big businessmen care about ethics when they have a money printing press like this?

Re:-1 troll

[Anonymous Coward]

By definition, a business model that destroys the business is flawed. It may be a successful get-rich-quick scheme for the key decision makers, but it is not a successful business model.

For a primer on the distinction, go talk to some former Enron employees. (Not senior management. Employees.)

Re:-1 troll

[wren337]

I keep hearing Norm McDonald's voice saying something like:

"You know whats funny, how sometimes when you do stuff, and then, then you say other people are doing that same stuff to you. Now thats funny."

Re:-1 troll

[Cognitive Dissident]

Yes, they have finally tipped their hand and admitted their real motivation in this case. They've all but cut and pasted from the Microsoft anti-Open Source rants we've seen from Steve Ballmer and Bill gates in the past. Is there a .DOC file or just HTML? If it's available as a .DOC the anal record-keeping properties of MS-WORD that have tripped so many other people up in the past might also catch MS and SCO in their game if it proves the link between MS and this anti-Open Source campaign. Heck, even if it's HTML you'd better read the souce and see if the comments indicate it was really written in Redmond.

The value of GPL as a 'business model' has absolutely nothing to do with their legal claims against IBM. The fact that they state it as if it is part of the case betrays that this lawsuit itself is just the vehicle that gets them the attention they want so they can propogandize for their real cause. They know they can't prevail legally. They are just going for the negative publicity to scare people away from Open Source products, and whatever possible delays they can cause with legal entanglements before they get sued into oblivion. SCO is executing the corporate equivalent of a suicide bombing.

Re:-1 troll

[babyrat]

I'm sure Bill Gates is wishing he'd had the forethought to use a pump & dump business model in the early eighties - he and the other executives could have split over a MILLION dollars instead of operating under a relatively long term business and being left with what they have now...

SCO vs OJ

[Anonymous Coward]

This has really became the Nerd version of the OJ trial.

Dr StrangeSCOve

[babbage]

Darl McBride's "surprise" at RedHat's suit is almost like a scene out of Dr Strangelove...

[The President calls the RedHat Premier.]

President Darl McBride: [to RedHat] Hello? ... Ah ... I can't hear too well. Do you suppose you could turn the music down just a little? ... Oh-ho, that's much better. ... yeah ... huh ... yes ... Fine, I can hear you now, Dmitri. ... Clear and plain and coming through fine. ... I'm coming through fine, too, eh? ... Good, then ... well, then, as you say, we're both coming through fine. ... Good. ... Well, it's good that you're fine and ... and I'm fine. ... I agree with you, it's great to be fine. ... a-ha-ha-ha-ha ... Now then, Dmitri, you know how we've always talked about the possibility of something going wrong with the Suit. ... The Suit, Dmitri. ... The legal suit! ... Well now, what happened is ... ah ... one of our legal staff, he had a sort of ... well, he went a little funny in the head ... you know ... just a little ... funny. And, ah ... he went and did a silly thing. ... Well, I'll tell you what he did. He ordered his staff ... to attack your industry... Ah... Well, let me finish, Dmitri. ... Let me finish, Dmitri. ... Well listen, how do you think I feel about it?! ... Can you imagine how I feel about it, Dmitri? ... Why do you think I'm calling you? Just to say hello? ... Of course I like to speak to you! ... Of course I like to say hello! ... Not now, but anytime, Dmitri. I'm just calling up to tell you something terrible has happened... It's a friendly call. Of course it's a friendly call. ... Listen, if it wasn't friendly ... you probably wouldn't have even got it. ... They will not reach their courts for at least another year. ... I am ... I am positive, Dmitri. ... Listen, I've been all over this with your legal representative. It is not a trick. ... Well, I'll tell you. We'd like to give your legal staff a complete run-down on the complaints, the allegations, and the insinuations in the lawsuits. ... Yes! I mean i-i-i-if we're unable to recall the suits, then ... I'd say that, ah ... well, ah ... we're just gonna have to help you destroy them, Dmitri. ... I know they're our boys. ... All right, well listen now. Who should we call? ... Who should we call, Dmitri? The ... wha-whe, the People... you, sorry, you faded away there. ... The People's Free Software Foundation. ... Where is that, Dmitri? ... In Boston. ... Right. ... Yes. ... Oh, you'll call them first, will you? ... Uh-huh ... Listen, do you happen to have the phone number on you, Dmitri? ... Whe-ah, what? I see, just ask for Boston information. ... Ah-ah-eh-uhm-hm ... I'm surprised, too, Dmitri. ... I'm very surprised. ... All right, you're more surprised than I am, but I am as surprised as well. ... I

Money for Nothing - redux

[Tsu Dho Nimh]

Normally I don't repost, but I wrote this too late in the last posting cycle and I want a +5 Funny rating.

Money For Nothing

Now look at them SCO-yo's that's not the way to do it
They say we're infringing on their IP.
It ain't workin' the way they try to do it
They're getting nowhere, lawsuits ain't free.
No it ain't workin', not the way they do it
Lemme tell ya them guys are dumb
They gots a lawsuit from them RedHat people
And a 'nuther from that IBM.

You gotta buy their UNIX license
Or else they gonna sue you guys
They gotta keep that FUD stream flowing
They gotta keep that stock price high.

See little Darl with the options and delusions
He's got no braincells under his hair
That little Darl wants his own jet airplane
Little Darl wants to be a millionaire

You gotta buy their UNIX license
Or else they gonna sue you guys
They gotta keep the FUD stream flowing
They gotta keep that stock price high.

I shoulda learned to play the market
I shoulda learned to pump and dump
Look at them, they got all those profits
Man I could have some fun
Darl's up there in Utah making lawyer noises
Bangin' out lawsuits like a chimpanzee
It ain't workin' the way they try to do it
They're getting nowhere, lawsuits ain't free.

Wha???

[DaveHowe]

SCO is accusing someone else of filing a lawsuit containing Unsubstantiated Allegations? This is from the Onion isn't it?

Unsubstantiated?

[jmkaza]

SCO's accussing IBM of making unsubstantiated claims? Did I wake up in Bizarro world this morning. At least IBM told them what code they were suing them for.

Grocklaw does it again!

[mj01nir]

Grocklaw has an overview of the IBM countersuit. And for added fun, the whole 46 page filing is available in multipage TIFF or pdf.

The patents are at:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PT 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
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PT 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
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PT 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
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PT 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

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!

*knock knock*

[American AC in Paris]

"Why, good afternoon, Mr. McBride! Me and Tiny here, we's here as goodwill representatives of our esteemed employer, IBM. We'd likes ta take a minute of your valuable time and substantiate our employer's claims against your organization. Would youse mind steppin' into dis darkened alleyway with us?"

Try again...

[Surak]

2.4.19. They're claiming 2.4.18 and later is infringeing.


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 /pub/scolinux/server/4.0/updates/SRPMS/
ncftp ...rver/4.0/updates/SRPMS > ls kern*
kernel-source-2.4.19.SuSE-106.nosrc.rpm
ke rnel-source-2.4.19.SuSE-133.nosrc.rpm
kernel-sour ce-2.4.19.SuSE-152.nosrc.rpm
kernel-source-2.4.19 .SuSE-82.nosrc.rpm
ncftp ...rver/4.0/updates/SRPMS >


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!)

IBM issues cryptic response

[Feathers McGraw]

ARMONK, NY - Aug. 8, 2003 -- "Dodge this."

Mass Small Claims Court

[mrjohnston]

Everyone is pissed at SCO. I am wondering if it would work to just have thousand/tens of thousands of people go and almost simultaneously file small claims court case against them. The amount (199-699) is perfect for small claims and we can all allege fraud and extortion, and sue for court cost (or maybe add on the attempted license fee too). In the suit we can say there is no proof to substantiate the license. If they show up you don't have much to lose and they have to show prrof so we would find out and remove the proof. If they don't you should be immune to further prosecution on that computer and they get stuck with many bills. If enough users file there is no way they could respond to this. Maybe this is far fetched, but I don't see why it wouldn't work. It would ultimately force SCO to quit this as we bleed them dry and they end up with almost no end users to try and charge without finally revealing their code and having it removed anyway.

Re:Beginning to look Valid

[defile]

None of these claims have any merit at all.

Two identical pieces of code can have a variety of explanations:

• A was copied verbatim from B (SCO -> Linux)
• B was copied verbatim from A (Linux -> SCO)
• A and B copied it verbatim from C (BSD IP checksum algorithm -> Linux, SCO)
• A and B both copied it from a reference manual/document/standard (hashing algorithm published in Practice of Programming by Kernighan & Pike)
• A and B implement an interface (the code may be part of a header file)
• A and B are not verbatim copies, just pretty similar (same algorithm, different authors)

Until they disclose more information, it can be total BS. The reviewers could even be outright lying.

These kind of claims are called "unsubstantiated claims".