Slashdot Mirror
RedHat Starts "Open Source Now" Fund
celston23 writes "According to this article (near bottom), RedHat is intending to use their Open Source Now Fund to support open-source (GPL) developers who are sued for copyright infringement. Might be used during the SCO legal battle."
This is awfully familiar, don't you think? (again, near the bottom)
Open Source's greatest feature and worst flaw is that it's free and open. Because there's next to no profit in it, software authors have next to no protection from getting sued. So in order to protect things like Linux from SCO, there needs to be some kind of a fund like this. Again, unfortunate but true.
You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
Why not just call it...
Save Open Source (SOS)?
Just realise the reality of the situation..... There is no reality.
Why is this necessary when we have the EFF?
Perhaps they could also use some of this fund, or another one, to start lobbying for less restrictive copyright laws? Even better, lobbying for legal recognition of the GPL would be a better goal. If the GPL is codified into law as an enforcable license, absurd lawsuits would carry far less weight in a court.
Of course, given the current makeup of the Congress, it would be more likely to see the GPL invalidated in national legislation than supported.
who keeps the interest earned from the fund?
Does it matter? Red Hat is sticking their neck out into a multi billion dollar lawsuit in the interest of their primary product (which is also a community of developers primary product) that substantial risk is very worthwhile additionally, they are using their clout and name recognition to attract donors. The use of corporate resources, image etc... is a service that even CHARITABLE organizations compensate.
I may have missed this on the home page, but is OSN a 503C non-profit?
Roving Web-Teleoperated Robot
Though it's great that somebody is willing to step up and offer legal protection to Linux, the kind that Microsoft are readily willing for the lack thereof. How will this help?
Take a look at SCO. For the last couple of months they have been spouting nonsense, slander and let's be honest FUD. In fact, in the face of the current IBM countersuit, they have the gall (read: stupidity) to launch another claim.
Now, all this is quite illegal, as IBM's lawyers have pointed out, but has it stopped SCO? No, not until 2005, at least. Until that time, SCO can say and do as it more-or-less pleases, until an injunction anyways. They will nodoubt reep the rewards for there behaviour, but that doesn't stop the damage they're causing in the meantime, until the courts get around to dealing with it.
Reason, let alone a cadre of Open Source Funded lawyers won't stop SCO. That's just the way it is.
This is a non-sequitur. The simple fact is that it is going to cost money -- a lot of money -- in order to prove that Linux doesn't contain any SCO material. Lawyers need to be paid, witnesses need to be briefed, exhibits need to be made, etc. All that takes cash, regardless of the merits of the case.
Finding God in a Dog
You know, back in the day, when I first came to Slashdot, Open Source was all about the free, wild and woolly creation of software, about freedom from The Man, and doing stuff because it was a Nerd Mountain and by goddamn we were going to climb it. I'm never sure if I should be happy or sad that companies such as Red Hat and Oracle are essentially hijacking the popularity of Linux. At the end of the day, is it about being on everybody's desktop or server, or is it about having written good code without a boss? Coding just for the sake of coding, fixing problems without having to beg marketing to let you do it.
What do I say this? Well, I just can't bring myself to believe that Red Hat has the interests of the greater community at heart here. In my view, they are simply trying to protect their revenue stream. Without companies turning to Open Source, they simply don't have any customers.
Maybe that's obvious, but I think amongst all of the support that this fund will have, it's at least good to have it said.
My god.. why the hell is it that no matter what kind of offer people make into the Open Source community, there has to be some nit-picking whiner trying to crap on the parade, or pick holes in it.
Put a sock in it.
"Hey! Unless this is a nude love-in, get the hell off my property!!"
Lest we forget that ANYONE who makes ANY money off of ANYTHING must be evil and their motives must be solely to continue to make more money.
Social Engineering Expert: Because there is no patch for stupidity.
Redhat doesn't HAVE to do this, and I'll wager it doesn't put "money in their pocket" as so many Redhat bashers seem to be obessed with mentioning. It's good PR, yes, but it's also good for the community.
Redhat makes IMHO the BEST out-of-the box distro. You want something that just works (tm)? 95% of the time, you're talking about Redhat. Is it perfect? No, not by a long shot, but it amazes me the sheer number of people who attack Redhat just because they are the market leader. Remember kids, if it's popular, it must be crap!
--Stupid Sig Here--
I feel like I've read that somewhere before.
In a related development, SCO has filed separae lawsuits against the government of Turkey and the Vienna Boys Choir for having employed eunuchs in the past.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
That's absurd. You've already licensed the software to them under the terms of the GPL. If you could just say "Oh, we changed our minds", then what's the point of the GPL?
SCO is not really obeying the terms of GPL. So either SCO can choose to obey the GPL, agree to a different license, or infringe the copyright of the kernel contributors and risk getting sued.
...SCO executive stock sales.
Linus owns the copyright to the word "Linux", right? Could he revoke their right to use the word "Linux" in any of their products?
I apologize if this is already well-known information.
The FSF, will say it should be SFS (Save Free Software), but you can use your orginal name as long as you put a GNU/ in front of it.
This seems different (though related) to the "Open Source Now Fund", which would specifically target legal threats against Linux and related things, like the FSF does for GNU.
I haven't been able to find any info on how to contribute to the fund. I spoke with many Red Hat people at Linux World about it, and they didn't know. I sent an email to opensourcenow@redhat.com, and they never replied. I've also been talking with Red Hat salesmen for the past week or two trying to put together a proposal, and they don't know either.
What's the hold up Red Hat? TAKE MY MONEY DAMMIT.
Wow, a lucrative publishing contract! I don't have to be evil anymore. --Meteor
If there is SCO code improperly copied by IBM into Linux, then...
So just what would happen? IBM might have to cure the infringement and pay whatever damages that SCO can proove. Even in the worst possible outcome, this will be a bump in the road for Linux. In fact, the FUD is doing much more damage than a successful SCO outcome could possibly do.
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
You can't copyright names. They're covered by trademarks. And it is totally within the bounds of fair use to call something by its name. The canonical example: I don't have to call it "that long race we have in Boston on Patriots' Day every year" just because the Boston Athletic Association owns the trademark "Boston Marathon". Likewise, if SCO is actually referring to Linux, they can call it that.
/. so often that it occurs to me that I've probably just been trolled, hard. Oh well.
This is a good thing.
And this comes up on
GPL is Free Software(R) -- Open source is a conciderably wider target than that. A quick look over the site doesn't show anything GPL-specific, just Linux-specific. BSDers need love too!