Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Is the SCO Lawsuit a Good Thing for Linux?

Posted by michael on from the tetanus-shot dept.

Jack William Bell writes "The National Post is running an essay by Wynn Quon entitled 'Linux's lucky lawsuit'. In it Quon claims that (A) SCO is going to lose (saying ". . . SCO is a toad about to face a steamroller.") and (B) the Linux community needs exactly this kind of 'inoculation' as the OS moves from a hobbyist platform to a real business tool. Good analysis or unwarranted optimism?"

3 of 422 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Er... no by xyvimur · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ``If Linux is to survive, it is imperative that its license, the obnoxious GPL, is tested in court''
    Thats exactly the point. And if GPL suceeds, linux wins, then business will not hestitate to accept, invest and use it.

  2. Re:Kind of by Trolling4Dollars · · Score: 5, Interesting
    ...if Linux is going to grow up from a hobby thing to something more usefull for the bussiness.

    Why is this a necessity? I don't care if businesses can use it or not. What I really care about is whether I can use it or not. So far Linux has provided me with a very inexpensive way of automating my house, building my own appliances and completely customizing my desktops for the ultimate usability. From my perspecitve Linux has been very successful from day one with it's injection into business being a less important and happy accident.

    Sure, the assistance from corporate coders who have contributed to Linux has been wonderful. But it should be taken as it is: it's free, volunteer effort dedicated to the betterment of the human condition through computing. There is only one reason to be involved with Linux and one reason only: because you love computer technology and OSes for what they are: cool toys.

    The thing that always irks me is the people who think that if Linux is going to "survive" it needs to somehow become this hugely popular OS that is commercially successful. This is not a requirement at all. It's a side effect of the dreck that has polluted American capitalism. Profit is not the only reason to do something. If anything profit should only be a side-effect in fair capitalism. That's real competition. Surviving by your own real abilities without putting any kind of spin on it. Microsoft puts a spin on everything because they have lost their center (or possibly never had it). For them the center is profit and the OS and software are secondary with the customer coming last. They only throw crumbs to the customer to keep them buying: "It's fixed this time. You just need to upgrade that's all!"

    If you were to completely corporatize Linux, it wouldn't get any better. It would just *LOOK* better. That's the difference. Good looks are never a good substitute for quality. Those of us that eschew Windows and embrace Linux know this to be true.

    --
    Un-news
  3. The real advantage by tesmako · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I think the real reason why the lawsuit is going to help Linux is because it demonstrates the depth of IBM's commitment. Ever since IBM started talking Linux it has been the most effective argument for Linux in business. Problem is that it is not obvious that IBM isn't just talk, while they spend a lot of money on Linux they have a lot of money, they could afford to lose their spendings on Linux no problem.

    Enter SCO, threatening IBM's core business through its crow-jewels AIX if IBM don't drop Linux like a hot potato. One could have no greater example to point business-heads to than that IBM stands up for Linux when faced with lawsuits affecting its beloved AIX.