Slashdot Mirror
OSDL Releases Q&A on SCO Legal Actions
craigoda writes "OSDL released a Q&A today written by Lawrence Rosen, noted expert on technology and intellectual property law. The Q&A points to serious flaws in SCO's claims that end-users have to pay for Linux licenses." The press release is a little more diplomatic, saying that the document only helps one determine whether or not one should buy a license from SCO.
Q: Should I buy a license from SCO?
A: No
Overrated / Underrated : Moderation
SCO, wow, I haven't heard about them for a long time! I was starting to wonder what happened to them.
Good Job Slashdot!
..they are saying what we already knew: "SCO is full of shit".
Wouldn't that be great if a big time lawer for IBM called a huge press conference to say just that?
"Thank you all for coming today. We would like to say, in response to SCO's most recent *finger quotes* allegations, that SCO is full of shit. Thank you all for coming."
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
a Q&A paper written by noted technology law and intellectual property expert Lawrence Rosen
Boy, that gave me a nasty start.
The coolest voice ever.
Here:
Sco's stock price drops below 11 and their claims grow louder and more rediculous. My only question is how do they think they will avoid the inevitable insider trading and fraud investigations.
if I bought a copy of Red Hat and it contained illegal code, there is no way I would even begin to consider paying SCO for the illegal code. Either Red Hat would pay SCO or Red Hat would refund my money and I would stop using the product.
The truth doesn't care what I think.
Let's see, they offer a PDF version and an HTML version. Hrm? I know! This is Slashdot, and we have to try and bring them down. Rather than link to the HTML version, let's link to the PDF version. I mean seriously, HTML is so not the prefered format for reading things on web sites.
Jason Lotito
How far up is SCO's head up their own ass?
Far enough to recieve legal advice from yesterday's dinner.
Yes, because by copying then to your hard drive you have made a copy. If SCO actually does own a piece of the code in Linux, AND it is decided that the GPL is meaningless, (or only applies when big companies feel like it) THEN simply copying the code (in source or binary form) to your system constitutes "use"
Thus, if SCO were right in all of their claims (highly unlikely the way I read it), you would be allowed to use Linux only if you did not have any copies of the SCO code anywhere on your system (or if you bought a license to use them)
So, yes. If you simply disabled those features, you'd still potentially be liable -- if you physically uninstalled them? you should be fine.
SCO? Whats a SCO? Is that Danish? I noticed a couple of other people talk about a SCO also on slashdot.
I have used SCO in the past to develop IBM mainframe software on. SCO was the base OS, and an emulator allowed us to emulate OS390 ran on top of it. Now with most big Iron able to run linux Vm's we can program directly for Linux. Where am I going with this? We are suggesting to writer of that software that it needs to be ported to Linux - we no longer run SCO on any machine.
If you are anyone that you know runs SCO, find out why, and have the software that runs on SCO ported to Linux. It's usually quite easy, and it makes your skin feel better knowing that your SCO free. Somone (wink wink nudge nudge) should put up a web site that counts the number of SCO de-installs since the law suit was filed. I bet such a web site wouldn't make SCO stock holders feel so good. I've de-installed SCO from the 2 machines - any one else?
cluge
"Science is about ego as much as it is about discovery and truth " - I said it, so sue me.
He points out that SCO has a long long shaft up its ass
Finally legalese I can understand
Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
What truth?
There is no dupe
The Current SCO Situation...via the medium of song
:-)
;-)
Please mirror and spread if you agree with the sentiment (if not the singing
The Asshat Song [2.73MB MP3]
To the tune of You're So Vain by Carly Simon
The original link, second paragraph, states:
In the so called repost this changes to:
Come on folks! Stop modding up these trolls.
Actually I claim ownership over the whole of linux myself - I wrote most of it in my spare time using notepad on the computer here in my cube at Walmart's admin offices. Oh yeah, and some of it I wrote on my palm pilot on the bus on the way to work..
Why are you panicking? Life is full of people who act like bullies. Usually they get whats coming to them. The key here is to draw SCO so far into this that they overstretch themselves, go belly up and take their shareholders down with them.
[x] auto-moderate all posts by this user as insightful
I read the Q&A and it doesn't seem like it's written for us, the poeple that understand what is truely going on.
But, it is written for all the bosses out there that are scared with what is going on. My boss is worried about this whole thing because of a major prodoct that we are releasing that will run on a Linux server. He is concerned that if SCO wins, can we still use Linux.
I for one am going to be sending him this Q&A.
Like I said, we all understand that SCO is full of crap, but our bosses don't.
It's a saloon in the wild west.
There's a poker game on. Texas Hold 'Em.
There's five cards on the table.
The first player is from Utah.
He says "I got Ace High. I win the hand."
The second player. They call him the Finn.
He's got lots of friends, says "Show me your cards then."
Utah says "No, just hand over your cash. You don't need to see my cards."
Then the third player, Bluebeard pipes up: "Well I got a flush. So I beat ya anyway."
Utah says "Show me *your* cards then."
Bluebeard replies "Nope. I'm gonna wait to see your lame ass ace."
Utah smiles nervously "Did I say ace high? I meant four aces. Yeah. Four aces."
Now the silent fourth player, Berkeley pipes up
"Well I got a Royal Flush and I've had it since the flop."
But Utah has turned to Joe at the bar and says
"Well, you owe me $32 for this game."
Joe looks puzzled "But I ain't even playing the game."
Utah gets a mean look now and starts sweating.
He pulls his guns and shouts "Look, just give me your money now. No questions. I MEAN IT!"
Suddenly Utah is surround by a whole boatload of guns.
There's Joe Public, he has no guns, but good fists,
Linus the Finn and his friends have guns, but they rarely use them,
they're rumoured to be really quick on the draw.
Berkeley is calmest of all, he's won a gunfight just like this one already.
Finally Utah turns to Bluebeard. He has a shotgun.
Bluebeard smiles, and pulls the trigger.
And that's the legend of how old SCO died.
Scam Con & Overcharge (NAZDAC: SCO) today announced a barrage of new lawsuits against users of pornography processing software called Linux. A proprietary IBM product, Linux allegedly violates SCO intellectual property. This new development comes on the heels of another SCO lawsuit against God for denying immortality to SCO CEO Darl McBurglary.
"Women and young children are viewing cartoon images of NAKED penguins!" shouted McBurglary, throwing his coffee mug across the room during an interview. "It's disgusting! And besides, it contains OUR intellectual property! It's a conspiracy! And everybody's in on it!!!"
When asked which SCO intellectual property was found in Linux, McBurglary commented, "IBM invented, developed, trademarked, copyrighted and patented certain technologies. Therefore, they are infringing on OUR intellectual property rights!"
SCO spokespersons refused to specify what constitutes the allegedly infringing properties. McBurglary had to be escorted back to his home at the looney bin by two big black guys in pinstriped suits. "Die, fucker, die!!" he yelled at some child walking down the street with a stuffed penguin doll. (I know we're only joking, but with SCO, it could happen!)
Scox isn't selling anything anyway. All scox earnings are fud money from msft and sunw. You need to boycott scox's controlling company: Canopy Group. I urge you to email these companies and explain that you will not do any business with them. I have included the letter that I sent to these companies as a sample.
v enueme.comr 7.com
s ales@communitect.com@ devicelogics.comp ipeinc.comf o@homepipeline.comd ustrialtrainingzone.como m@ mi-corporation.com,c .com,t hTools.com,l es@caldera.com,c om
B oycotting all companies affiliated with SCO/Canopy
---
salesinfo@altiris.com
help@customercare.a
support@culturegrams.com
sales@cente
sales@cerberian.com
sales@cogitoinc.com
yslew@datacrystal.com
info
info@directpointe.com
info@fat
info@geolux.com
sales@helius.com
in
sales@iArchives.com
sales@in
brutledge@linuxnetworx.c
tyler@luxul.net,
sales@maxstream.net,
jclary
info@mti.com,
pr@myfamilyin
info@perimeterdata.com,
ProTools@SaberToo
ronastarns@aztecenterprises.com,
sa
info@trolltech.com
info@tuglet.
sales@viawest.net
Sales@wrenchead.com
---
I have worked in IT for 25 years, and have been involved in several major purchasing decisions.
I am infuriated at SCO/Canopy's attempts at fraud and extortion. As well as SCO's FUD campaign against Linux.
As such, I will no longer purchase, or recommend the purchase, of any products or services from any company that is even partially owned by SCO/Canopy. I intend to encourage my colleges to do the same.
... would have made a nice headline coming
right after "SCO attorney declares GPL invalid"
You wouldn't owe them any money anyway. They are suing IBM for damanges caused by the alleged contract infringement. Demanding $ from Linux users for the use of the code is a form of double indemnity and is generally not allowed by courts.
"Anyone that has ever gotten an idea based on any of my work and done something better with it-good for you."--J.Carmack
I just read on the conectiva linux site, their position on the SCO X IBM court case.
"There is no evidence that any piece of the Linux Kernel, from version 2.4 up, is of SCO intellectual property."
I just wonder if there is anyone out there that supports SCO in its claims.
the goatse "person" to replace the /. SCO logo. Tubgirl is first runnerup.
IRA McGee over at LinuxToday had a brilliant suggestion, if you get one.
Call your local USPS or FBI and claim MailFraud
the objective of mail fraud is to accomplish a desired result by deception, trickery, concealment, and/or dishonesty, albeit through the use of the United States Mail Service or other private/commercial interstate carriers
This is taken serious and hopefully will result in Darl getting his behind serviced on a regular basis.
Help fight continental drift.
Due to all the confusion about licensing and registration of your Linux package,
we good folks at Blackbag Opz have completed work on an all new registration kit for the confused.
Just run *this* easy to use SCO Registration Kit,
fill in the blanks, check "Number of Cycles, Infinite" and press the SEND button.
Sit back and wait while your SCO-Linux EZ registration kit does the hard work for you!
And sleep well tonight knowing that SCO got your message!
Let me suggest you all email HP
Help fight continental drift.
So how is this different from a typical commercial software license? I notice that the License that SCO recently published excludes indemnification against the incidental inclusion of IP they don't own, even in the code that they claim is all theirs. I don't think this is unusual. Nor is it unusual for the software to come with a statement that it isn't warranted to do *anything* at all useful and a warning that it may do something harmful. The only obvious risk to the vendor is that you might stop buying.
But of course they are little shits.
No disagreements here, but that wasn't the point I was making. I was just helping to define "use" of IP according to US copyright law. That is not to say that, in this particular case, I think it will come out that way.
Just read SCO's outlandishly absurd reasoning why the GPL is invalid. It went something like: 'Copyright law gives right X, no contract that can be construed as granting any rights beyond X are valid'
Woah!!! but... what if I buy 5000 licenses to SCO's bullshitware. Those licenses would also be invalid by the same logic: after all, they grant me the right to make 5000 copies. 5000 is more than one, thus: not valid
Oh, and about not being liable because IBM is?
Assume, for the moment, that SCO owned IP that IBM gave to Linux. I know, it could never happen, but... just pretend for a minute.
Also lets assume that you are using Linux.
In this case, SCO can sue IBM for trade-secrets violations for giving code to Linux that is wasn't allowed to give away.
Additionally, however, you are using SCO IP without permission. Since IBM (or your distro) chose not to indemnify you against IP claims, you COULD (not necessarily, but quite possibly) be liable for damages. If you are a public library or educational institution and had a valid reason to believe that you had the right to use the IP (like you acquired a license that said you could from a provider without the authority to make that claim) then you would be allowed to remove the IP and avoid paying damages.
Otherwise its up to the judge.
Oh. I missed one other essential assumption: SCO never released a copy of its IP under a license that allows limitless copying (such as, say, Caldera under the GPL) Because, you see, if I am offered a license (a contract granting me certain rights, and forbidding me others in exchange for some (possibly monetary) value) to duplicate the software, and the organization granting the license had the right to do so, then I can do whatever the license says I can do. After all, thats what we agreed to. Contracts are binding like that. If you sign on the dotted line you are stuck. Especially if you wrote the contract (or offered the boiler-plate contract)
In short: because SCO released a copy of Linux under the GPL (assuming it survives a court test), and especially because it can be easily proven hat they know they did so (I'm sure it had a copy of the license on it) they are SOL.
Yes but Unix code in general has been used as examples in operating system programming. One of the big problems SCO has is Unix has been around so long that core features of it have been used in many other places than Unix.
So here are some links with some history and the battle SCO has is to prove that the code they see in Linux didn't come from these sources instead of IBM because if it came from these sources there is nothing SCO gets.
Public Money, Private Code
Quote from above: In 1992, Berkeley released its version of Unix and TCP/IP to the public as open-source code, and the combination quickly became the backbone of a network so vast that people started to call it, simply, "the Internet"
Why Caldera Decided to Release Unix
From that article note that Caldera did release Unix source code on some version and again SCO has to defend against the chance that code came from this source. And though it appears in protected System V it was also present in the release V7 and V32.
Introducing the Caldera OpenLinux Workstation
From thie quote on the above:OpenLinux is Caldera's self-hosted source code Linux distribution that conforms to commercial software release procedures. OpenLinux is based on the most current stable open source technologies, but subjected to rigorous testing procedures similar to those used for proprietary operating systems. How can SCO clain they did not see infected code go into Linux if they had standards that if up to proprietary operating systems would include a check as such.
Berkley Lab Notes
My question here is if you follow the links on this page and understand the history of Unix and how it became freely released can anyone tell me what if anything was left propietary in Unix?????
And maybe that is a question SCO should be answering.
And really this needs to be explored in detail because what does System V have that BSD does not and how does the BSDi vs USL case affect the Unix propietary code.
I know this is redundant it has all been said before but the Q&A is right. Without SCO showing the code in question and that code be compared to so much of the Unix system that legally leaked into the world they have no case.
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said: "I drank what?" - Chris Knight (Val Kilmer)- Real Genius