Slashdot Mirror
Eric Raymond's Homebrew SCO Poison
What Can You Expect From A University Named "UH?" writes "Eric S. Raymond responds to Darl McBride's charge that he's drinking IBM's Kool-Aid in SCO's fight against Linux.
The main thrust: Yes, there is an alliance against SCO, but, like the Open Source movement itself, it arises from lots of folks spontaneously striving for a common goal. 'It's beyond me how [you] can have the gall to talk as though we need funding or marching orders from IBM to mobilize against you. IBM couldn't stop us from mobilizing!' "
That rant pushes the edge of legal. One could definitely consider some of those words to be threats. I just hope they don't come to take him away. He's needed right now.
First off, I think he sounds moronic with those StarWars references, secondly, there's a relevant Halloween 9 out.
Belief is the currency of delusion.
I was truly surprised when I first encountered something like open source. It was on a mud not linux, but people were spending many hours coding and got very little appreciation for it. They still coded away. Linux is much the same way exept the code is more important. Now, if you try and take that away from them, I promise your in for a fight. You can't take someone's baby away. Dreams are better as dreams than reality.
I also have sent off a message or two to various people, trying to ensure that all the various data items that come up, each of which refutes SCO claims in some manner, get brought together when the court case starts.
For example, in response to a prior claim that the copyright law prevents the GPL from allowing users to make multiple copies, I wrote:
There is an obvious flaw in that reasoning. It focusses on the the public, and not on the copyright holder. A copyright holder decides how a work is to be released, after all, and it is perfectly legal for a copyright holder to release something to the Public Domain, in which case everyone can make unlimited copies. So, the actual relevant fact is the copyright holder has the right to decide on any degree of release between public domain and not-at-all. Therefore, when the copyright holder releases something under the GPL, the copyright holder has decided to accept the GPL's details for a release. In such case the copyright holder is giving the public the right to make unlimited copies, which fact does NOT violate the copyright law.
So us all a favor. Drop the suit, dissolve the company, and walk off with your ill-gotten public opinion manipulated profits.
The exact same response found in the link provided in this new story can also be found in the final link update in the old story. See Update: 08/22 18:26 GMT by M: ESR responds. Hence this is a duplicate.
I don't think IBM's support or possible covert actions in aiding Open Source is any kind of problem at all. This reminds me of the views of some when Red Hat originally started charging significant money for their Linux distro; there was a minor outcry that they were profiting off of Open Source, and that this was suspect.
To use a "software evangelism" analogy, look at all the various religions out there. In any given one, you'll find a bunch of factions/denominations that do not fully agree with one another, and that are of varying size and influence. Does this weaken their movement, overall? No. What it does is broaden the appeal of the religion for people of differing views, and keeps the debate alive internally which is crucial for their vitality.
Having a variety of companies out there that are on the spectrum of non-profit to small-profit to big-profit is no issue at all, as long as none of them can take over the work for the purposes of excluding everyone else.
On a related note, regarding IBM, I'm wondering why they don't take the position of offering legal counsel to (at least some of) the users currently being threatened by SCO. While it's completely understandable that they aren't going to provide complete indemnity (arbitrary claims such as SCO's times millions of deployments could theoretically come to basically infinity dollars), supporting the users who are currently being attacked by SCO would give IBM major karma points with the Open Source community, as well as giving them the opportunity to force SCO into revealing more about their alleged case. And, quite possibly, with the legal bills SCO would rack up defending a countersuit from all the users they've threatened, just implode them before the case ever gets to trial. This would be good for IBM and Open Source.
~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
Umm... which is it?
FWIW *my* calendar has 23 August 2003 as being a Saturday, and 20 August 2003 being a Wednesday.
***
That detail aside, I love this letter. Thank you, Mr Raymond. That was inspired.
I'm a little concerned about the side threat "As the president of OSI, defending the community of open-source hackers against predators and carpetbaggers is mine -- and if you don't stop trying to destroy Linux and everything else we've worked for I guarantee you won't like what our alliance is cooking up next." It worries me that Raymond would phrase things this way.
I suppose there are a lot of non-violent actions that he could mean: tens of thousands of small claims actions (an idea which I love), protesting, etc. But there are some illegal ones that could be inferred from his statement: DOS, DDOS, DRDOS, etc, that would cause quite a stir; after all, aren't the ones that SCO's going after (the Open Source Community) in possession of (and the authors of) "subversive" source code (in McBride's eyes) that could be used against him on the Internet if the Community deemed it necessary?
No, no, don't flame me; I'm merely trying to put McBride's way of "thinking" (if you can call it that) onto Raymond's letter.
I am sure Raymond meant nothing of sort; however, in McBride's state of dementia and loose grip on reality, I wonder what he will think.
I hope, if it's necessary, that IBM (or more likely the EFF) will be able to send in the lawyers on Raymond's behalf. But I hope even more that it won't be needed.
"Sometimes the truth is stupid." - Lawrence, creator of Prime Intellect
of the sco ranting and raving. who cares? its only a bleeding operating system! cmon /. - give us stuff that REALLY matters!
There is a basic problem with open source
software - great though the idea is in
principle - there is nothing to stop someone
sneaking in some (C) code, then later standing
up (maybe under a different persona) and sueing
everyone for breach of copyright.
Ok, thats not *exactly* whats happened
here - but you get my drift.
Perhaps some sort of special legal protection
is needed - in the same way charities enjoy
a special status..
Code declared to be "public" must be posted
to special government sanctioned database.
Anyone who thinks and can prove breach of
(C) can apply for their code to be removed from
the database, but will not be able to sue for
copyright breach for anyone using it for the
duration it is posted (plus some nominal period
of, say, 2 months or something like that)
Just my 2 cents..
"You lied to me! There is a Swansea!"
I read this a couple of days ago, and found it rather refreshing.
Eric only said what is on the mind of everyone in the free software/open source movement.
SCO is hitting below the belt, playing dirty ball against free software. It is about time someone vents their outrage.
To paraphrase McBride, the GPL is null and void, and those free/open source guys need to rethink their whole world view, or pay the consequences.
How can you not get upset in the face of such meglomania?
Lodragan Draoidh
The more you explain it, the more I don't understand it. - Mark Twain
Take that offer while you still can, Mr. McBride. So far your so-called ?evidence? is crap; you'd better climb down off your high horse before we shoot that sucker entirely out from under you. How you finish the contract fight you picked with IBM is your problem. As the president of OSI, defending the community of open-source hackers against predators and carpetbaggers is mine ? and if you don't stop trying to destroy Linux and everything else we've worked for I guarantee you won't like what our alliance is cooking up next.
This guy is all over the place, from humor to near, on the fence, threats....but someone has to give McBride some "tough love" and tell it like it is, for his and everyones own good. Ideally this would suffice but I sincerely doubt it will get through the thick skulls over at SCO.
Hell of a read though.
Sehr geehrter Toilettenbenutzer!
Erm, no. Check his email address, its uh.edu as in:
http://www.uh.edu/
We'll know when SCO goes after Apple.
Hey, It could happen right?
Four weeks, Twenty papers, that's two dollars
Yes, I cheerfully refer to myself as a gun nut. Because after I've done that myself, idiots can't bash me with the phrase. Since it doesn't take most people very long to notice that I am not in fact crazy, this maneuver has the effect of discrediting the idiots.
- Eric S. Raymond
Woah... the last thing I'd want after me is a pissed-off hacker with an AK-47.
The US Army: promoting democracy through unquestioned obedience
Similar story occurred in England, too, when Northumbria University considered changing its name to "Cumbria University, Northumbria and Tyneside" ...
A, uh, shorter nick? :-)
Please help metamoderate.
It worries me that Raymond would phrase things this way.
It worries me too, particularly because it is Raymond saying these things. I mean everyone knows that he's a gun nut - and one with a bad temper at that. Anyone else think it is ominous that he posts this on a website called 'Armed and Dangerous'?
And we thought the DDOS attacks were bad publicity.
I'm not sure which possibility is more pathetic -- that the CEO of SCO is lying through his teeth for tactical reasons, or that you genuinely aren't capable of recognizing honest outrage when you see it. To a manipulator, all behaviors are manipulation. To a conspirator, all opposition is conspiracy. Is that you?
Seriously, is tech industry culture overrun with sociopaths fitting that description, or is this my own weird coincidence? Did Gates start this "movement"?
Can I bum a sig?
Ouch!
Although this sort of ranting is useful for getting frustration off ESR's chest, it doesn't further the cause any more than DoSing the SCO site does. Reasoned, well-thought-out responses will have a lot better effect than giving Darl more ammunition for his own tirades. I think the open-source community in general has been doing a good job of keeping its responses level-headed, and we need to keep fighting the good fight.
...can I get a check from IBM too? Anybody know what benefits I get once I'm on payroll? Medical? 401k? Do I Have to wear a tie?
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
SCO is fighting a war not of fact, truth or honor, but one of perception. Mr. McBride seems mainly interested in raising SCOX share price regardless of method and it has been effective so far, the stock price went up $1.30 ( just shy of 10%) on Monday. Gee, press releases really are a short term substitute for R&D.
I don't really feel sorry for the people that are going to loose large with the influx of daytraders that see SCO as a good inventment and powerful force that can shake even the mighty IBM. They will have lost their money in spite of the truthful information that is easily found. But when they do start loosing large chunks of money, SCO will feel the backlash and it won't be pretty. Those people will have no real allegaance to SCOs business, ideals or Unix history, only money.
I think it is going to be a blood bath that SCO will be luck to escape, ESR has given a good accounting of motivation that the investors are likely to ignore, probably until it is too late to save their investments.
Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see. - Mark Twain
Because then they would be effectivly acknowledging that SOC's claim may be valid.
The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination
- Douglas Adams
ESR has done a good job so far sticking to the facts and not getting drawn out by the trolls, but the next few weeks will required both patience and tact. SCO and MSFT are in the final phase of circling the drain and are going to try to take others down with them.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
That make me proud to be a part of the OSS community and a regular controbitutor when I can.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Make no mistake, this is not about who is right or wrong, although we all wish it was. This is about money. SCO is like a tick under the skin of Linux. They're going suck as much blood (money) out of the situation for as long as they can.
Despite his protests about the "attacks", McBride is clearly enjoying the fact that people actually know the name SCO. From the article:
"Relevant in the technology industry"? Come on now. The only reason they're "relevant" is that they're threatening the health of the technology industry. It's like saying gential warts is sexy.Like a donkey that starved to death between between two haystacks...
If all open source spokespeople / gurus speak up like this, pretty soon the board of SCO will feel like that donkey, unable to start suing for whatever reason because they are unable to choose where to start. How much capital do they have? How long will it take for them to bleed dry?
All together now on three....
What food?? I hear he sucks the blood from unsuspecting linux programmers, sleeps in a pine box lined with earth and only comes out at night.
The only way to kill him is to sprinkle jolt cola on him and drive a copy of the GPL through his heart.
Otherwise he'll just live for centuries and every so often jump out of the closet to sue IBM.....
So Long and Thanks for all the Fish.
It's the user name, not a story title.
Read it again. It says "USER writes ESR RESPONDS" where USER is the mailto link, and ESR RESPONDS is the story link.
Infuriate left and right
When I clicked on the link, I got McBrides view on the matter, and a whopping IBM ad in the middle of the interview..priceless.
Save a Life. Donate Blood. Please.
Sorry, I left out the -tags :)
The last paragraph is worded so strongly, especially the bit about fraud and IP theft, you can't help but wonder if some unnamed soul hasn't laid their hands on a copy of SCO's code and found GPL'ed code in it. The Linux personality module comes to mind.
Huh? Looks OK to me. The ridiculous slashdot user name has a mailto: link, the article (second link) is a rather long URL to a web page which, in slashdot tradition, I haven't read.
if you were offering to pay us Linux users $699 apiece, we might change our attitude.
All I thought of was that he and some others (Bruce? Linux? RMS or FSF?) were getting som elegal response up, and had visions of a donation page to helpo the cause. The vision of thousands of geeks donating for lawyers ought to set off alarm bells in SCO shareholders ...
Infuriate left and right
Research them??? (reach perhaps?) I think I better learn to use the preview button. I should also stop talking to myself as I doubt anyone but me is now reading this, though if they are, they'll think I'm crazy!
but I'm sure SCO is going to be reading it looking for ways to sue him, not to hear his message.
News Flash: SCO wants our money, not their code removed. In the case of Linux, they have no financial incentive to show their cards - they cannot occupy a better position than they do now. As soon as problems are solved they newspapers lose interest, and SCO has to be a product producing business again. We have see how well they do on that basis, and anyway who wants to deal with them knowing how they've approached this issue? I sure don't want to deal with people like that.
This is not going to go away until they get squashed in court. They have made absolutely sure of that, by making incredible claims of ownership. The suspicion of free software from proprietary software trained CEOs plays into their hands. Those people, the ones who make the decisions, don't trust the opinions of the geek world. They listen to lawyerspeak. Hence, the SCO problem doesn't go away until it is clear in the never-never land of legal affairs that they have no teeth, however far fetched we might find their claims.
Nor would it matter even if the community took the extreme action of moving to FreeBSD or Hurd, or developed a new kernel altogether. SCO would simply make more claims that they have IP that any possible functional OS kernel would have to infringe on. As awful as it sounds, that is in fact the purpose of some IP claims - people want to occupy strong positions to be able to legally make claims like that. So it doesn't sound as bizarre to some people as it does to us. I doubt it is true, but they have nothing to lose at this point and SCO will cling to the ankles of the open source community until they are struck off by a judges gavel. Nothing else will carry any weight whatsoever.
So kudos to ESR for telling them off as they deserve, but aside from those already convinced SCO has lost it this won't do much. In corporate america lawyers are IT in matters such as this. We are going to have to batten the hatches and weather the storm, because SCO has targeted open source. This has (IMHO) been about destroying the free software world from day one, and they won't stop even if the linux kernel gets abandoned. There will still be a viable free operating system out there of some kind, and they will still have more work to do. We can't satisfy them as long as we exist.
"I object to doing things that computers can do." -- Olin Shivers, lispers.org
It's all nice and good that people are rebutting SCO's wild (and daily) claims, but why are they all filled with the same spittle-fringed invective and circus atmosphere? I could understand phrases like 'smoking crack' and 'drinking kool-aid', I could expect droll movie references, I could predict overzealous bravado from the pages of Slashdot. But why are these child-like protests included in the official "open letters" being sent to mainstream press and directly to SCO's offices?
It embarasses me when I see the "luminaries" of the Open Source (and Free Software yadda) communities begging for attention with such antics. It just entrenches the world's view that all Linux users are immature, unwashed hacker bumpkins with Luke Skywalker style gadget belts, a DeCSS t-shirt, and a security-cracking Zaurus in hand.
IBM is the role-model here, as well as the champion of our battle. IBM has successfully married pin-stripes and rack-mounts. While we're not "passing our statements through IBM" and IBM isn't "orchestrating" our feedback, they surely could teach us something about effective and professional resistance to the legal challenges brought against Linux.
[
Unfortunately Darl McBride has shown he is, for lack of a better phrase, a friggin' nut case. This means it will be impossible to reason with him. He won't realize what a laughing stock he is until SCO lies in ruins and the stockholders have nothing left of value.
Like others have said, if the evidence shown so far is their best evidence, we don't have a damned thing to worry about, and in fact SCO will be found guilty of violating the BSD license.
Now, if you'll pardon me, I need to run to the bank and cash my check from IBM...
I want a new quote. One that won't spill. One that don't cost too much. Or come in a pill.
really is this just a troll or what? probably
does more damage to the open source community
then any good.
i mean was the guy drunk or something?
It makes "Flamebait" on slashdot seem "Insightful".
... Taco has once again swallowed the Slashdot re-post Kool-Aid. (Click on the link under "ESR responds".)
Always keep a sapphire in your mind
... isn't Microsoft on SCO's side? Aren't they the ones really 'pulling the strings' of the SCO puppets?
Its okay for 'us' to say "Microsoft is the machiavellian lord behind the scenes of the SCO front", but not for SCO to say it about IBM...
I dunno. I think its about time Herd was released.
; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
What we need is for someone to force SCO to reveal the allegedly infinging code - in public, not under NDA. Cannot someone get a ruling that, since it will have to be disclosed in court, it should be disclosed now?
... oops, already done. This is all in the works, and the court will amost certainly require the alleged code be revealed publicly within a few months. End of SCO.
... they will have to do so, and failure will result in contempt of court and/or fraud charges. I.e. if they don't reveal it to red hat when so ordered, and then try to use it in another court case, Darl et. al. will be having a deep, meaningful relationship with Bubba, compliments of their own contempt of court charges. Do not pass go, do not collect $200.00.
Que Red Hat
There is almost certainly no infringing code whatsoever. But, in the extraoridinarilly unlikely event (statistically indistinguishable from 0.0, I suspect) there is infringing code, it will be removed immediately upon revelation, and $CO will be able to collect on $0.00 damages, as they have done the exact opposite that the law requires (work to mitigate the damages), trying through deception and secrecy to maximize any damages. Which does not fly, even in these dismal times. Never has, probably never will, and certainly won't for SCO. Their hands are "dirty," the code they reference has already been declared public domain by a court of law in an earlier AT&T v. BSD case IIRC, and if not, comes from so many textbooks (including at least one that places no restrictions on reuse of the code) as to be common knowledge. Their "trade secrets" case is dead in the water, and they have no copyright case.
Red Hat has filed to force them to reveal the alleged code
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
You are correct. Thats just a bizzaro name. Maybe have the user name all in quotes or italics? and the article link only on the word "responses" and not on "Eric S. Raymond"?
The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
esr@thyrsus.com
President, Open Source Initiative
Friday, 20 August 2003
So now Eric Raymond is attacking SCO from other time dimensions? SCO is in DEEP doo-doo now!
Take a blue pill, Eric. Who do you think you're speaking for? What is your "alliance" cooking up next? An 10% increase in the amount of outrage on Slashdot? 15% more "IANAL, but somewun shood sew SCO!!!!" posts? Ooh, how about a "yeah, us too, they're, like, bad men" rider on IBM or Red Hat's counter-suits?
I for one would really like to know what ESR and his OSI disciples are "cooking up". We've heard enough bullshit and veiled threats from SCO over this matter. I am simply not interested in being associated with someone prepared to lower himself to their level in that respect.
Put up or shut up, Eric. And while you're at it, don't drag Linus into this. He's a big boy, he can speak for himself.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
But there are some illegal ones that could be inferred from his statement: DOS, DDOS, DRDOS,
:-)
Despite much FUD to the contrary, I don't believe DRDOS is illegal.
If my memory is correct, however, it is owned by SCO (or some parent/sibling company thereof), and should hence be boycotted.
I'm a little bothered by this post, as the fact that the open source community and several others (even DRM critics) protested SCO's suit by themselves - rather than being led by IBM's initiatives - was established in March, days after the suit was filed.
... but then again, that's what we love here at /.
This may be news to the legal community, which deciphers new chunks of information every three months, and then ponder it for awhile before reacting - whereas the tech sector made it's independent blast of SCO as soon as they saw how shallow their actions are. Luddite to say the least!
This post is simply an opportunity for those that don't care to get another chance at counterproductive mud-slinging
Call me paranoid but I am asking myself where MS and co will stop to have the Open Source Mouvement crushed. I would not be surprised to suddenly view in the news a prestigious "leader" of the OS Mouvement being accused of pedophilia or harrassement, you know. Everything to remove the credibility of someone and what it represent. I think SCO and all is a gentle idea of what Microsoft could be cooking in the background. After all, there is BIG money involved and we know that Ms won't let go, by any means.
He's the first person I've seen who makes ESR look like he's *not* a paranoid conspiracy nut! :-D
A little planning goes a long way...
Dear Darl,
I knew when we went all weekend without a SCO story that things were a little off. Now the only SCO news we get are dupes. Are you feeling OK?
You haven't said much in awhile. Either the ESR response cornered you (doubtful) or you've run out of things to say (more likely). Darl, please issue a new press release. We haven't heard from you in awhile and I want to make sure you're still OK. You were innovating so much with all those press releases, one right after another, and now with this lack of press releases I wonder, have you stifled your own innovation? Also, I haven't fallen on my ass laughing boisterously since Friday, and I need some inspiration. Thanks!
Your friend
PS I still owe you a SCO license. The check is in the mail, I promise.
There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
:wq
SCO's MIT mathematicians go AWOL
e rnment/legalissues/story/0,10801,81973,00.html
SCO said, they had three teams, including a team from MIT math department, examine their "proof" of UNIX code improperly in Linux
1. No such team could be found at MIT. And SCO are back tracking on this claim.
http://www-tech.mit.edu/V123/N33/33sco.33n.html
2. Here is an example quote that SCO made about MIT math involvement:
http://www.computerworld.com/governmenttopics/gov
SCO was able to uncover the alleged violations by hiring three teams of experts, including a group from the MIT math department, to analyze the Linux and Unix source code for similarities. "All three found several instances where our Unix source code had been found in Linux," said a SCO spokesman.
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11208
Actually I think someone should shut him up or give him some lessons on tact. Sure he's pissed of with SCO but we should be taking the high ground on this and not ranting and calling people names and having a go at a whole state just because that is where SCO are based.
Secondly his comments on this DoS attack on SCO are outragous, sure he might know who it was, but don't go bragging about it and don't associate the whole OSS movement by saying stupid things like this.
"He's one of us. He is part of the community around open source software and the Internet infrastructure and he's pretty senior," Raymond said.
Right, so what he's saying to a casual observer is that all OSS developers are vandals who resort to illegal acts when someone pisses them off just because they have the skills to do so.
You can mod me down for having a go at one of the open source figureheads, but he needs to think about the results of what he says before he says it.
Tom.
For my part, I thought it a well constructed, amusing, angry rant, worthy of the widest possible dissemination - perhaps you need to read it again with your brain in gear.
oh brave new world, that has such people in it!
...that discusses getting preliminary injunctions against them, you can go here.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
Where have you people been? This was originally posted on Slashdot on Friday. This is a repost of: This. See the Update "ESR Responds".
Why the hell is this a troll? (b) is pretty damned funny. :-)
Please tell me this post is based on the usual fucking idiocy and laziness shown on
RagManX
He may have said that he knew who was responsible, but that's a long way from endorsement.
Remember, you're reading a repor, written by a reporter, not Raymond's own words.
Personally, I thought the open letter fair, balnced and highly amusing - it needs to be viewed in the light of the SCO PR output, rather than any legal cases pending.
oh brave new world, that has such people in it!
I'd rather hear this than the shuffling of piles of legal papers in Utah. McBride (lose the sneering bio photo - it's surprising it's taken this long for someone to verbally try and smack that smirk off his face btw...) has been using the legal system to drive a tank through a problem that could have been solved in a long weekend by a handful of reasonable people. Eric is simply being honest and refusing to turn the other cheek now that McBride has slapped him, Linus, and the entire community repeatedly. It's the equivalent of fighting words, and someone's calling him on it. I envision McBride up to this point a little surprised that so far no one has thrown the punch this apparent bully seems to deserve.
Do I like ESR playing Marty McFLy to Darl's Biff? You bet.
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
I've always likened IBM's Open Source strategy to the Green Berets. Spend a small amount of resources to win the hearts and minds of the natives, arm and train them to fight their own battles. They effectively operate as a force multiplier for the native combatants.
;)
;)
This strategy, when it works, results in a win-win scenario for both the natives and the US. The natives are more highly motivated than any foreign army, and they receive the support that only a large nation can provide. The US makes a relatively small investment, as opposed to the investment required to wage the battle with their own army. The US is then free to focus their own resources on other fronts, effectively forcing the enemy to fight a multi-theater war.
Now, substitute IBM for the US, the Open Source movement for the natives, with Microsoft (and SCO) wearing the black hats and the similarities are pretty resounding.
Some organizations mistakenly think they are successfully employing this strategy (MSDN, Java.net, etc). But ask yourself, when was the last time Java developers or Microsoft developers rallied to oppose a common opponent? I mean, besides the sponsoring organization itself
The difference is in the message. The right message is "This is your land, we believe in you and are here to support you because your interests are our interests". The wrong message is "This is our land, but we're going to let you come here and work to accomplish your goals within our rules, to meet our interests."
Whether they are conciously following this strategy or not, IBM is effectively and successfully executing it, whereas Sun and MicroSCOft think they are but aren't. The interesting wild card here is Apple. They know and love this strategy but everytime the natives win a battle Apple sends in their own forces to proclaim victory - not a good way to keep the natives pacified
SCO = Stupid, Confused Org.
ESR = Eric's SCO Rage.
IBM = It's Better Manually.
IANAL = I Am Not a Lawyer/Llama.
I hope this clears up the confusion for TECBA's.
(Those Easily Confused By Acronyms).
Have you read the moderator guidelines? Well, have you, PUNK? (and I want a Karma: Gnarly option)
internet news
oh brave new world, that has such people in it!
There's lots of comments about how ESR "isn't speaking for me!" and shouldn't be lowering himself to the level of SCO's attacks. Frankly, I was refreshed and glad he said what he wrote for a couple of reasons.
One, it said what I've been thinking for ages -- you're screwing with the wrong community on this one. Some of you are going, "What? What community?" Maybe it's just me, but there is a large number of people, using open source, who basically have the same mindset about such things. No, we don't always agree, but that's our strength, not our weakness. Flexibility is more profitable than agreement. ESR's commentary is just playing back what a lot of us, maybe not all of us, but most of us have thought about SCO one time or another.
That being said, another reason is because in order to mobilize a community of anyone, you have to have inspiring people to "wake up" the masses and get them thinking in terms of defense, retaliation, protection. ESR's letter maybe be frank, bold, perhaps even cocky, but it gets the point across -- we're getting tired of this shit. Time to do something about it. Perhaps this won't mobilize anything and y'all will just stay reclined in your chairs sipping another Bawlz. But if it gets you on your feet asking what you can do to further the open source movement and defense, well...then the job is done.
You might not fully agree with ESR and you might think he's a pompous prick, even. But I think his point still rings true -- SCO is being a real dumbass and they're getting way annoying. Time that they put up or shut up, and if they don't, the community (for whatever that means) needs to start taking the stage to defend what we think is worth defending.
Blog,Twitter
This is fantastic. Not only does it reek of sarcasm and humor but it's a pointed and direct address of Mr. McBride's criminal activity. I am very glad to see an articulate open source advocate cast aside the niceties and really jab the pointy stick at SCO.
This saga has gone on for WAY too long. I wish there were more we, as individuals, could do to rally against SCO. For now, even if the code is found to be offending, I have no RESPECT for them. They are sleazy bastards who are attempting to drive this lawsuit and collect damages, and anything they say about "protecting intellectual property" is complete bullshit.
I am sad, very sad, because I'm upset enough that this has been allowed to continue tht I honestly want to see collective revenge. I want the SCO execs in jail.
The actions that they've taken shouldn't be permitted in a civilized society. They should be ashamed, and their mothers should too. They are hijackers. They are new-wave terrorists. And they deserve the same fate.
McBride is a troll, plain and simple. Responses will only encourage him; personal responses even more so.
I've been to Utah, it's really quite nice.
Everything else about the article is dead on.
"The avalanch has already started, it is too late for the pebbles to vote." -Kosh
MS & Co. would have **way** too much to lose if they got caught. I know they've already bent a few laws, but this would be going WAY far out. Imagine the outrage!
And I'm guessing Eric doesn't live in a vacuum, and I'm betting he's probably got a pretty tight little network.
Still, there was that movie, not too many years ago, starring Tim Robbins as the "Bill Gates" act-alike (name escapes me).
"Sometimes the truth is stupid." - Lawrence, creator of Prime Intellect
Seriously. His rhetoric is weak. This whole screed could have been summed up in the phrase, "there is no conspiracy against SCO, merely a group of people with a demonstrable common interest in overturning its policies."
But instead, it's a thousand-word, sophomoric rant accusing Darl McBride of being not as "smart" as people at IBM, boasting that he (Raymond) isn't afraid of lawyers, and topping it all off with that non sequitor about Utah.
It's just inflammatory. It takes a kernel of well-reasoned argument and wraps it up in several layers of immature hubris and bravado. I can't imagine this having any positive effect on anyone with a degree of pertinence in the case at hand; like much of his work, I suspect its real purpose is to inspire populist support and reinforcement for ESR's own ego.
I think the only thing I want to read by ESR from now on is fetchmail.
Personally, I think esr has done the right thing here. If someone threatened my family, my community (read OSS in this case) or myself then I would hold my ground and stand up. Too many people and organisations let others push them around.
Anyone else here not understand the reference to UH? What does the University of Houston have to do with this story, and why should I be sending email to djmsd@svec.uh.edu? Who is djmsd? No reference to any of this in any of the linked articles...
He made a comment near the end of the article about "serving my people". While I admire ESR for his single-minded zealotry, I also fear that same single-minded zealotry.
I'm glad someone is out there fighting for What's Right, but agreeing with ESR on this topic doesn't automatically make me one of "his people".
Does it?
-sharv
I'd ask if you'd found the right sort of isolated wasteland for your citadel of dread yet, but that would be a silly question; you're in Utah, after all.
What sound does it make when the hopes of hundreds of Linux users of getting ESR to attend a LUG meeting are hopelessly dashed?
Who am I to blow against the wind? -- Paul Simon
Seems like somebody is pissed. At least he acts that way. I hope it not just all druming and no musik.
Don't get me wrong, I find it entirely apropriate for someone to vent like this. But he better really have something up his sleve if he goes by threatening SCO in that way. Otherwise he'll make a complete fool of himself.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
I'm a little concerned about the side threat "As the president of OSI, defending the community of open-source hackers against predators and carpetbaggers is mine -- and if you don't stop trying to destroy Linux and everything else we've worked for I guarantee you won't like what our alliance is cooking up next." It worries me that Raymond would phrase things this way.
In other news, Ted Kaczynski requested that the Department of Justice release more of his personal documents and one of his pipe bombs to a local University. From said University, OSI partisans plan to conduct a "letter writing and 'special package'" campaign to the C-Level of SCO.
I don't think such dark motives lie in our community.
What those who want activist courts fear is rule by the people.
This report does paint a much better picture, I guess I should have read around a little more. But then this is slashdot ;)
Tom.
1. Buy SCO sell options - enough to gain $200 for every point it falls.
2. Buy SCO stock - enough to lose $100 for every point it falls.
3. ??? (Something involving IBM, I suspect)
4. PROFIT!!!
5. Sue SCO execs for loss incurred due to point 2.
6. FUN!!!
Any sufficiently advanced libertarian utopia is indistinguishable from government.
high res graphics (both vector and raster) of calvin peeing on the sco logo: find them here:
http://www.geocities.com/psyborgue/
Ps: SCO logo from sco.com
Is SCO involved in stock-market manipulation and racketeering?
Does any of this stuff apply to SCO? - stock manipulation schemes, insider trading, providing false SEC filings, providing false company financial statements, lying to company auditors, broker embezzlement
I mean, if SCO was acting criminally, then I am sure Mr. Ashcroft or Mr. Goring, or whats-his-name _________ supports the efforts of the OSS community and the GPL copyleft, and would help US, EU,
OldHawk777
Reality is a self induced hallucination.
Unaccountable leaders are masters, and unrepresented people are slaves. How do US and EU fare?
I think you're missing a very important and self-evident point here. What he wrote was "the very best kind of ally..."
On that score, he's 100% correct. Of course alliances are formed out of self-interest. But they are vulnerable from that very position. The
interest can shift, and more importantly, can be shifted by opposing forces. The very best kind of allies are those who are working on principles, rather than some material self-interest (which is certainly strongly implied in the use of that term).
Well, if that's the University of Houston, you can expect:
:)
The best non-linear physics department in the US (and perhaps the world)
The home of high temperature superconductivity (above 30K)
The best Spanish language program in the United States.
A law school in the top 25%
An impressive English department.
And many other tit-for-tat claims to fame.
If that's the University of Hawaii, then I would expect it to be closely related to the birth of computer networking (as we recogonize it now). After all, Aloha Net is (or should be) required study for anyone who wants to understand the orgins (and assumptions made along the way) of networking. I'm sure that there are many other "claims to fame" over in Hawaii, but I've never been over there to hear them
Considering the subject matter, the above statement is very condescending. Should we state "What do you expect from a University like Harvard?" when we talk about Gates's latest threats to Linux, or it's latest defiance of the US Justice System?
There's no doubt that in our current predicament it's enormously satisfying to read such a punchy, relevant and direct bit of writing. But after all these months, and all this press, it seems to me that SCO is a straw man we're all knocking down over and over again, and while it's really easy and fun too it's not getting us anywhere.
There is nothing we can say to Darl McBride or his company that will cause him to rub his eyes and exclaim "Whaaaa?!" He knows precisely what he's doing. He will continue his absurd crusade no matter what we say. He will keep making incredible statements with a shit-eating grin on his face, because his stock-pumping scheme is working, and he and his executives have already made millions doing this. He will ride it until there are no more dollars to be squeezed out of the situation, then he will move on to something else or retire and buy a carribean island.
Of course we should be fighting this tooth and nail. But I don't think letters appealing to Mr. McBride's sense of reason or morality are going to get us anywhere.
In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane. -Oscar Wilde
Just because you can shout louder than everyone else doesn't make you right or a representative of the community as a whole. Linus calling McBride crazy is one thing. You making threats is just juvenile and an embarrasment to the rest of us. RMS doesn't try to pass himself off as a Linux representative, and he does a very good job of it.
The very best kind of ally is one who comes to one's side for powerful reasons of his or her own.
Wrong... Alliances are formed because they serve a self interest.
Self interest doesn't equate to one having powerful reasons of their own?
DeviceLogics appears to have once been Lineo, which used to be part of Caldera, which is now SCO.
Oh, and in Spring of this year, DR-DOS 8.0 was supposed to have been released. They're currently selling DR-DOS 7.03, source code, and some other stuff.
First link is supposed to be an e-mail link. It's the name of the person who submitted it. Click the second one.
Self interest doesn't equate to one having powerful reasons of their own
You missed the point. To think that IBM has come to the side of OSS because of this high driving principle (e.g. idealism) is wrong.
Yeah, self interest is a very powerful reason and like I said, I was not discounting that.
sad robot making broken music
In general, I don't think so either.
But there are MORE than a few of us who don't go into The Big Room much, and in some ways have lost their grip on reality (McBride, for example).
So, while those motives certainly are not common in our community, they quite likely exist.
"Sometimes the truth is stupid." - Lawrence, creator of Prime Intellect
Not exactly. ESR also intends this letter to servere explicit proof that it wasn't written by IBM then stamped by ESR. ESR intentionally didn't pull any slurs because each one proves it sources from the opinion of one man, not a behemoth of a company. And that's what you have to take away from this, too. The letter is not the voice acting of a representative (supporter, yes, representative, no), but as a single person. I think the letter acheives exactly what ESR wants it to achieve, and I appreciate him for writing it.
Fools, because too many of you don't know, care, or realize, just how important this right is.
You could've hired me.
The authores of Halloween take great care to shoot down assumtions the updated claims make, but probably miss the point as much as people clamoring 'show us the code, and we will remove it'
IMO SCO doesn't care one bit if their code is in Linux or not. they want to achieve three things:
All the discussion in the press and the clamoring of an angry OpenSource comunity only serves item 2 and provides free PR.
I do not know if IBM has done the deed, but it will be pretty easy to prove if the code was properly 'seeded'. And all the legal archeology of old SysV code will become moot.
personally I enjoy the H9, as a piece of documenting Unix history.
followed by
which could easily be a mob threat. Do you want your boss to see this in the press?
Or
We don't have official press releases or public relations departments for the Linux and open source community as a whole. I'm not saying there should be and ESR has the right, president of OSI or not, to make any comment he wishes. I just think that this type of thing does more harm than good.
Don't worry. He is baiting McBride/Norda to come after him. I would guess that ESR is trying to get them to do/say something that he can take them on with. Right now, McBirde/Norda is attacking Linux via IBM. If he can get them to step over the line in his direction than he can (and will) persue SCO to the nth degree.
I wouldn't worry too much about it. I really suspect by the end of sept, things will get interesting. Right now it is dirt being thrown by SCO, but it is worded in a way that will not allow a real libel suit to go forward. Fortunatly, McBride is not that bright.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Although not explicitly stated by ESR in his letter, it would appear that he considers Darl McBride to be a "varmint" in the classic Warner Bros. cartoon sense.
The proper term for promising Legal action and not doing it is Barratry..
r y
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=barrat
Whereas ERS promising that if certain action is not stopped that SCO and McBride wil face legal consequences is a perfect legal statement to make in that it does not open OSI or ESR to any other liabilities..
as it stands Now any Linux User not charged by SCO Group has the right to ask the court to convict SCO group on Barratry charges..
Don't Tread on OpenSource
OK, assuming someone could 'sneak in' code for some nefarious reason - that code would most likely be inconsequential to the function of the operating system. Try 'sneaking' code into the TCP/IP stack and see how far you get.
So company X yells 'plaigarism!' and you yank the 'sneaked' stuff out, problem solved.
If the said 'sneaked' code was of functional consequence, then many eyes would be looking at it, critiquing it, and modifying it. The case that the code was 'snuck' in without the parent company's knowledge would be on very shaky ground - which I believe is the case in the current SCO affair.
Everyone will start to cheer when you put on your sailin' shoes.
'Nuff said.
OS Software is like love: The best way to make it grow is to give it away.
or so they claim.
At least he seems a lot saner than Darl McWhoever. That counts for something....
900% means it's gone up by ten times. Your numbers are all off by 100.
Now do you get the idea?
Infuriate left and right
If it raises by 900% it's value is 10x more not 900x
So, you invest 1$ and get 10$
Black holes occur when God divides by zero.
How many "gun nuts" do you know? Everyone I know who is a gun nerd, knows enough to only point the barrel at something they intend on shooting/killing. You must be a democrat.
Can you refer me to something that Eric has shot out of rage?
It's like characterizing all hackers as virus writing 18 year olds living in their parents basement. Most programmer, even with bad tempers don't write viruses; why should a gun nut with a bad temper be considered violent?
Joe
Joe Batt Solid Design
As long as he doesn't resort to this, I think we'll be alright. I would place money on Eric vs. Darl in a fight even without Eric's .45 Eric's pretty skilled in martial arts.
Kind of nice to have an Open Source leader who isn't long haired and unkempt that will also go shooting with you and your LUG :)
Why isn't Stallman doing anything about SCO? Is he too busy criticizing Debian and other Linux distros for not following his beliefs?
This guy is way out there
Um, sometimes a dupe is a good thing. Slashdot stories sometimes move so fast, things get missed. This story for example -- you say it wast posted multiple times in other stories, but I missed it. When it came up this time, I saw it, and I'm glad I did. This was a fairly important thing, so it's not really that big of deal to have a dupe.
:)
(ok, now I'm sure I'll get many posts saying that I should read more and keep up more and so forth. have at it
Place sig here.
Slashdot already has this article posted, including the links.
My post, like this entire thread is redundant.
sorry I didnt have time to do the actual lookups, but I figure those too, would also be redundant.
cant Darl and the rest of SCO just go back to surfing porn and leave the rest of us alone...
I didn't really consider what he wrote to be a physical threat to anyone, though it's certainly a legal gauntlet he's thrown down (or rather picked up, since SCO is the one who initiated this legal mess).
ESR has written some faily provocative material, but I think he's really trying to provoke thought, rather than violence. He's a self-proclaimed "gun nut," but why does that worry anyone? He's never used a weapon on anyone that I'm aware of, and until he shows a proclivity towards unjustifiable lethal violence, it's difficult to justify any sort of sanction. Prior restraint, whether physical or intellectual, is hardly justifiable in this instance. It's also worth remembering that violence is not always the wrong path (here come the pacifist flames), despite what they are teaching in school these days.
For example: his article on "when to shoot a policeman." At first blush, this kind of thing immediately raises my antennae; I used to be an LEO, of the tactical-team variety. If anyone's likely to be a target for killing, it would be a fellow like myself... yet I didn't find the article terribly alarming. He actually argues AGAINST the killing of policemen, except in very extreme circumstances (total breakdown of civil liberties... where the police become a tool of tyranny). Frankly, I'm glad people like ESR feel passionately about their rights, and are willing to defend tham... civil rights are what separates the US from the world of brutal dictatorial regimes. Frankly, if I were a policeman under such conditions, I would give up my badge; I would not be party to gratuitious abrogation of the rights of others... THEIR loss of rights is MY loss of rights. This might come as a surprise to some Slashdotters, but virtually all the cops I've ever known were able to make that intellectual leap.
Most LEOs would never be a part of such wholesale represssion. Such atrocity creates an unholy bond between the masters and their agents, one that binds them to the same fate, usually a bloody one. ESR simply states a willingness to use the "final option" against a repressive, tyrannical government. This discussion may make people, myself included, uncomfortable, but discussions about revolution are hardly comfortable things. Now personally, I would look a bit askance at an individual who considered mass violence, societal upheaval, revolution, and bloodshed comfortable everyday topics... yet some simple intellectual discourse about such things should not be cause for sanction. ESR may be a strange guy, but I respect his intellect, and trust that he knows the difference between philosophical debate and action.
But back to the topic at hand, I actually liked his letter to McBride. Some people will no doubt attack it as juvenile... I thought it was hilarious.
Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
Ever see "The Insider?" It's a dramatization, but most of the facts are fairly accurate. As long as nothing directly links the threats to the top brass, I don't think there's anything the law can really do to seriously hurt the corporation...
And as we all know, rich people don't get in trouble for perjury, which gives them a lot of leeway in the event of investigation.
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
Ah, well. Raymond was worked up. His insult to the state, in my opinion, was unwarranted. But then again, why hasn't Utah's AG gone after McBride and gang. These guys are doing more damage to the tourist industry than they can imagine.
Need more SCO crap to start your day? Check out ESR's and Robs commentary on SCO's response to IBM's counter suit.
Why is this modded +interesting, and not +funny, or even more appropriate +offtopic?
I don't know why the original poster didn't just lump all of them under the catch all blanket phrase "DOS attack".
No.
Well, it all depends on your style, really. The one thing I can say for sure is that Warren Buffet will not be buying this stock.
Reliable, Great Value Hosting: $7.95/mo 2.4G/120G
This venting is fine, but what are you people really *doing* about the whole situation? I put a post out on the Omaha Linux User's Group http://olug.org this morning - a call for those actively involved in eroding SCO's market share to speak.
...
We found one guy who killed one SCO box, another guy who is going to remove a dozen from his business by the end of the year, and we discovered THE WORLD'S LARGEST SCO INSTALLATION is right here, infesting our fair city.
I know that this company has already announced internally that they're going to Redhat in place of SCO, but the systems guys are fighting them - Redhat means porting work, while NetBSD is binary compatible.
Is there a binary compat mode for SCO on Redhat? Is there some technical reason why the NetBSD implementation is favored by their techies? Enquiring minds want to know
I am very easy to get along with, but I don't have time to waste being nice to people who are being stupid. -Theo
Anything good a company does increases shareholder value. IBM CEO Sam Palmisano gives money to charity, IBM looks good. An employee who saves someone from a fiery burning wreck and gets mentioned in the paper along with the letters "IBM" has increased shareholder value. What you seem to be forgetting is that the value of a company is not just monetary, there are things like "brands" which have a value in and of themselves. So, once again, anything the company does to make themselves look good, increases shareholder value.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
If 32V were a BSD-derivative, it would presumably be subject to the same relicensing that Berkeley did for all the rest of it's software, and the new BSD license is sans advertising clause and GPL-compatible.
In the gist of all these retractions folks are betting their farms on SCOX.
That's it. Let's give up. Nothing can stop it already.
"...but I live in the US, not one of you more violent countries..."
since when?! We've had civil war, forced annexation of lands belonging to other countries, wars against several major European and Asian powers, one of the largest arsenals of nukes ever assembled, and that's all on a government level. On a personal level, we have gang violence like drive-by shootings, muggings, armed robbery, thrill-killing, killing of people because they are in a neighbourhood with the wrong skin pigmentation, domestic and foreign terrorism, and many other problems...
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
RMS speaks briefly on the SCO issue in this interview.
Are we talking market value?
Then yes, image effects market value. Apparently this has not hit SCO yet, but it will....believe me.
Are we talking about actual sales?
Then yes, image effects sales. I think this has already hit SCO, which is why sueing is the only way to make money.
Thinking otherwise is to say that the whole PR-business is built on false premises.
$hit! It is, isn't it?
Oh yeah, I see the socks-and-sandals crowd all_over downtown during the summer!
Has anyone considered the idea that perhaps they are going to amend the open source software definition to allow discrimination against SCO?
Imagine the case that Samba, for instance, was GPL except for SCO, which would have an outrageous licensing fee. Seems like FSF floated that idea already with GCC, didn't they? SCO *has* to use Samba, but can they afford to do development on it themselves?
What if all software packages changed licenses to a "GPL but for SCO" license. That means SCO could only use software up to the license change, and make modifications and improvements themselves. What would their cost be for that? And wouldn't that show other companies that the free software community can't be messed with?
Dunno, but the FSF floating that idea makes me think thats perhaps what ESR is referring to.
This is not specific to Open-Source or Computercode. You could "sneak" in copyrighted works everywhere without proper attribution or proper licensing. If it comes out it's usually the problem of the person that sneaked the stuff in. So in this case it'd make sense for SCO to publish the alleged "copied" parts so their origins can be traced back and the culprit found.
If i hand you a big box with some illegal contraband in it (that i know of), is it me or you that's at fault and may be target of a legal investigation?
It's really simple: if someone gives out something he has no right to he should know better and he may be targeted by prosecution, but not his customers.
"By the way if anyone here is in advertising or marketing... kill yourself." -- Bill Hicks
Antitrust.
Nicotine free Amish .sig.
SCO sued IBM in March, claiming that the Armonk, N.Y., company had inappropriately contributed code to the Linux operating system in violation of a Unix licensing contract that IBM had signed with AT&T but that had later been transferred to SCO. In May, Novell claimed that it, and not IBM, had the rights to the Unix source code -- a claim it later retracted.
Novell never retracted their claim to own the UNIX license. What happened was when Novell pointed out publicly that they owned the license to UNIX and SCO had been asking them to sell it to them, SCO produced an addendum to the contract which they said transferred the license. Novell pointed out that their copy of the contract never contained that addendum, but has not said anything since. Later SCO published the quoted sentence almost verbatim in a press release (IIRC it was a quote from Darl McBride) and the press has been plagiarizing it ever since.
I would be willing to bet hat the Novell lawyers are feverishly tryingto figure out the following:
1) in this wacky world of law, can "double secret" addendums be considered legal?
2) How far does the Judge's imagination need to stratch for this?
3) Does the contract say itself anything about addendums?
4) Where did this addendum come from?
5) Can they punish SCO legally for fabricating the addendum?
My reaction on reading this- looking at the language, grammatical errors and date anomaly- was that it has been written by someone else. It seems a bit too irrational, and ill prepared. Doesnt fit somehow! Am I completely wrong?
Much of what you're getting at happens automatically.
Question. If it breaks on SCO is that a bug or a feature?
(That's without changing any code or documentation;)
Sabatoged Computer Operations ??
Not exactly. People patricipating in what we've tentatively codenamed the "Friends United Concerning Kernel Ownership Fees For SCO" are technically independent contractors who get paid monthly based on their performance, on top of a base salary. You can find out more here.
Anybody know what benefits I get once I'm on payroll? Medical?
Yes.
401k?
Yes.
Do I Have to wear a tie?
Nope.
And, if you get 5 or more people to sign up from your place of work, we come to your job and bring free sodas every day, and install a foosball table. And air hockey, too.
Cmon. Admit it. You thought about doing this but decided to be mature. I can't believe I got this name.
Are we viewing this whole situation too narrowly? We all know Microsoft wants Linux and the GPL discredited and that is why they "licensed" (ahem...opinion here, money laundering) SCO's intellectual property. But isn't this a two-front business war they are playing? Think about it. They provide the capital to fund SCO's drive to discredit Linux. But in turn, SCO has destroyed any corporate goodwill they might've had in the process, thus discrediting independent Unix (not tied to hardware, such as HP, IBM and Sun) as a solution. So in effect, Microsoft through its proxy combatant [SCO] is effectively hurting Linux AND Unix all at the same time. I understand now why Microsoft indemnified its customers, conveniently before SCO raised their asking price from $1 billion to $3 billion in the lawsuit against IBM...
"Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
As George W. Bush once said, "They think there's a cave deep enough -- they're wrong." I'm sure he meant that figuratively.
"You have a choice. Peel off that dark helmet and deal with us like a reasonable human being, or continue down a path that could be bad trouble for us but will be utter ruin -- quite possibly including jail time on fraud, intellectual-property theft, barratry, and stock-manipulation charges -- for you and the rest of SCO's top management."
SCO has been doing their best to get their legal disputed tried in every venue except a court of law where they know they'll loose. If ESR had simply said, "I disagree with Darl McBride and SCO," there would be no press coverage whatsoever. What he has done, instead, is to fire off a equal but opposite inflamatory rant to match the spewage from Lindon, UT. There is no threat contained in his rant other than that SCO will wish their ex-ambulance chaser management team hadn't provoked the open source community. More precisely, there is no threat of either physical violence or illegal action and thus, nothing illegal.
It is an excellent rant though.
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
Ben
ESR's already done the serious bit. The OSI's latest document, written by Rob Landley and ESR, is such an awesome, sober, closely reasoned demolition of the SCO legal complaint that you would imagine IBM could just write "MOTION TO DISMISS" at the top of it and stick it in the mail.
The useful value of this amusing rant is that it potentially widens the audience. Because it's extreme and amusing it get passed around and will be seen by people who aren't going to click a headline to read the technical details.
This could have material value. There is a general assumption that when a company like SCO makes public statements, those statements have a reasonable amount of truth in them. That assumption's what's been keeping SCO's stock price up. If it becomes common water-cooler chatter that Darl McBride is a paranoid loony, then those ordinary business types are going to be a little more inclined to check the facts before believing the press releases.
If SCO's stock price were to collapse under a weight of disbelief, the backers would get cold feet and the whole problem could disappear.
Tell it to the drug users and Jons.
I wish he'd think about them a bit more, though.
His first letter to SCO had a lot of good material in it, but the whole 'Who owns Unix, anyway?' section was embarassingly off-topic and completely undermined the rest of the paper and the open source movement, making it look like justification for wholesale piracy. Some people in the community may think that way, but we all don't, and don't care for the attention paid to ESR's views.
This new message is not a step towards the high road.
I doubt any judge would declare the GPL invalid even if there was an explicit inclusion of BSD code because this is a project put forward by multiple groups, and to do so would penalize them all, when harm to BSD copyright holders is non-existent. I would add that SCO cannot sue anyone over BSD code, they aren't a party to any of those damages. You also have to be reasonable, this is common sense at a certain point.
I believe that the Northumbria story there is number 306 in the list of "names which former polytechnics considered but which turned out to be a bit rude when abbreviated, tee hee". There's more of those than there are ex-poly universities in the UK, and I don't think any student of these matters would consider any of them to be more than urban legend. Let me guess, a friend told you that they'd heard that...?
ChaosDiscord makes a good point. Not many things are totally black and white (even though many people would have you believe otherwise). People need to really think about these things.
...interesting if true.
This draft of his rant is certainly better than previous versions but let me recount all the reasons I'd rather ESR stop being THE spokesman for the open source community:
1. I'm really uncomfortable when he uses the term "my people". The wording suggests someone on a power trip and I sure wish he would stop acting like he speaks for everyone in the open source community. This latest rant sure doesn't reflect the kind of rhetoric I want the open source community to be putting out at this point.
2. In a previous draft he threw out his juvenile infatuation with being a Jedi knight, AGAIN. Its not cool for someone ESR's age engaged in a deadly serious debate to dredge up a juvenile ego trip. I wish ESR would buy a copy of Star Wars Galaxies and vent his star wars fixation in semi-private. Since Lucas started the prequels he pretty much trashed the whole franchise anyway. To keep using references to it in the real world doesn't work.
3. Slamming Utah as a whole for the dementia of SCO is really inappropriate. I'm pretty sure a lot of open source enthusiasts live there and detest SCO as much as anyone. It conveys a classic arrogant Califnorian/New Yorker viewpoint where the entire middle of North America is a wasteland you fly over to get someplace important and rational like California. Oh wait minute.... California.... rational????
4. When was ESR appointed emperor of the open source community. Can we have a recount. When is the next election so I can vote for Bruce Perens. His rebuttal to SCO was well researched, factual and valuable versus ESR's juvenile rant which does more harm than good.
5. As I recall ESR was a key player and board member in the VA Research/Linux/Software. Apart from giving options to open source developers that company doesn't strike me has having been well managed and the board is responsible.
6. ESR's threats in his latest rant are hollow. If there was a real leader heading OSI they would have started a legal fund, acquired a good lawyer and filed a suit to get a cease and desist order against SCO already. The should being taken substantive action to stop SCO's protection scam and their defamatory rhetoric against innocent people like Jay Schulister. Thats what OSI should be doing and not engaging in public ranting and threats. SCO's already patented that strategy.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/136646_minkweb .html
Trust me. The stock rise and the missing minks are connected. Do minks hunt penguins?
=googol=
I think SCO's tactics have taken way too much of everyone's time and ink.
There's no point in trying to rebut SCO's statements because they are just cynical manipulations of the public, designed to milk the last bit of value from their doomed stock. If they were stupid enough to believe what they say they wouldn't have the mental fortitude to dress themselves.
Just let them babble in the wind until their own lawyers turn on them and sue the crap out of them. I think SCO is openning themselves up to a Class Action Suit for the all lies they've dished up, and maybe SEC violations as well for their attempt to manipulate their stock (disclaimer: IANAL).
Poetry!
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
I don't see how anyone could consider what the judge is legally correct, morally correct perhaps. Legally, he is obligated to follow the orders his superiors, regardless of the circumstance. Apparently he believes that he is following a higher, but still secular, law. But Secular law doesn't work that way. Their isn't a higher law that must be obeyed reagrdless of what a supperior orders. This is no different then someone refusing to hire a black man because he only counts as 3/5 of a person in the constitution.
Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
"If you don't like the word "karma", fine, "goodwill" then. And I am quite aware IBM feels this is a good business model."
Exactly... and goodwill is one of the most valuable assets a company can have.
My Blog
SCO stock probably went up because the analysts looked at some cards with code samples. The analysys probably said, "looks like the same stuff, so thereforce SCO will win -- UPGRADE"
Problem is that many analysyts are not worth a sack of S___. They don't understand all of the issues - they're just trying to make a quick buck for their company and investors. The sad truth is that once something is reported as news on Marketwatch or CNBC or Bloomberg, it no longer matters whether the information is accurate or correct - the stocks move.
Movement in the stock market is not driven by facts, technology, or capabilities -- it's driven by speculation and opinions.
The stock market is just a game who's rules change as fast as the technology the traders use does.
Maybe instead of having a peacable conversation, you were actually ranting like a loon in a public place?
I have a hard time believing any police officer in Canada would threaten you with verbal assault because he overheard a conversation.
We don't bust people on immigration; you are not required to prove citizenship on the street in canada, nor are you required to carry papers. If they suspected you were in the country illegally, they could hold you until you proved otherwise.. but they'd be wide open to a lawsuit if they didn't have a good reason.
I'm willing to bet you were probably a lot more obnoxious and loud (read: American) than you let on.
This was Posted on Friday.
YHBT.
What was very interesting was the case of a famous Holocaust denyer and author who was on trial in Canada a number of years ago. Basically they had to prove that he didn't actually BELIEVE his own misleading evidence, in order for what he was claiming to be hate speech.
That distinction is important, even though he's doing is hateful, because otherwise you could be prevented from publishing anything that reflected badly on any specific group, true or no.
I agree, the truth is complicated.
Um, not necessarily, I'm afraid. Witness the DeCSS judgement.
'"Disclosure of this highly technical information adds nothing to the public debate over the use of encryption software or the DVD industry's efforts to limit unauthorized copying of movies on DVDs," the court wrote.'
Whereas, ESR's public contribution to the SCO debate would, assumedly, adding something to the public debate over SCO.
Speech is still protected by free speech laws, even if code might not be(/always be?).
Hmm - buy something just so you can sue someone else about it. Nice precedent.
Author, Shell Scripting : Expert Re
Ok people if we want to strike back at SCO in a meaningful way we need to do it in an acceptable way.
DoS attacks against SCO will do little but make them look good and Open Source look wrong.
Idea to correct SCO view:
Write letters (Paper ones) to any company using SCO software threatening to boycott there products unless they stop using SCO products. Get your non technical friends to do the same. Then follow up.
Case in point. Pizza Planet uses SCO software, thousands of computer geeks write Pizza Planet letters threatening not to buy Pizza Planet pizza unless they stop using SCO. (I don't know about you but I eat a lot of pizza.) Then we all stop buying Pizza Planet pizza. We keep doing this with more and more companies until it is a corporate liability to use SCO software. Make sure as many reporters as possible know what we are up to.
This has dual effect. It should drop SCO's stock price as it becomes harder for companies to use there software and remain profitable, and removes SCO source of income. It also will send a message to the corporate world use SCO and we will stop using your product.
This is the old tried and true boycott activism. The catch is you must have the numbers and follow through to make it work. You have to affect the bottom line.
A website with a "wall of shame" (AKA Corporate SCO Users), form letters, postal addresses and email addresses would be a good way to coordinate the actions of many.
Then get the word out to as many people as possible. If we make it difficult for SCO to get and keep customers we can stop them. SCO runs on money, that is how you hurt them.
-
Let's Put SCO Behind Bars
All rational discourse with no foaming at the mouth.Request your free CD of my piano music.
If you go in the mainstream news outlets, the news is that Linux is under assault, that it could be declared illegal, like Napster and file swapping. They print everything Darl&SCO say, without rebuttal because it is very convenient to print and sounds good. Average folks in this day in age, when they hear people from SCO mimic the RIAA, they assume Linux is a pirated OS and if they use it they WILL BE SUED, they don't know the story, they believe the propoganda. IBM is hardly a lovable company, and people tend to root for the underdog, which to an outsider looks like SCO. By saying in 'non-legal' language the level of outrageous behavior by SCO, average people begin to understand what is going on. What ESR is doind is a wakeup call to them, in a language they understand.
If you approach this situation with purely stultifying logic, the average Joe will think you are guilty because he doesn't understand you. The minutia of evidence in a broad political sense is IRRELEVANT. The evidence was overwhelming that Microsoft abused their position, but they had the political support to get away with it because they have convinced the average Joe who voted for Bush. That is what is going on here, they are trying to win a political battle. If they win this battle, right or wrong, lawsuit or no lawsuit, they will prevail. This is big time, Linux people everywhere need to step it up. It needs to be clear in the media that SCO is the bad guy. Right now, no matter how you feel about SCO, they have a better position in the media. And I remind you, this is the same media that has Jerry Springer, and Fox News. That is the kind of audience that needs to be educated, not programmers or hackers. The message that needs to be put forward is that SCO are a bunch of carpet baggers, who use lawyers to steal the IP of others. That message is NOT getting out!
There is no universal law that says good will always triumph over evil. We cannot afford to be complacent about this. We need to be active, relentless and intelligent in our decision or we may LOSE. It needs to be clear they are putting a multi $billion industry and a $5 billion OS investment in danger for a company that netted under $15 million and makes a living by suing other companies.
The Canopy Co.(owner of SCO) sounds similar to the Umbrella Co. (Resident Evil).
sco is an active member of linux international and an active supporter of open source software
sco is not responsible for the misuse of any of the information we provide on this website and/or through our security advisories
-- two successive entries for "what is sco" on googlism.
"THIS LAWSUIT FOR AMUSEMENT PURPOSES ONLY"
Yea, woe is unto me. Yet, how may I returnth unto thine graces? Lords of Akron, they did cast aside offers of sustinance of their fathers and shun the Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company to pursue their divine truth. Under Eno they did prosper, and in the days and years that followed, born unto them was Cake. And it was good.
What does this have to do with the Star Trek?
This space intentionally left blank
This is a very real threat to the future of Linux and OSS. It is not a minor attack, nor even a snide comment from MS that Linux is a cancer. It is a direct legal assault on every linux user. If this fight is lost, then the future of free computing will have been lost for all of us. That is the magnitude of the threat.
I know that it may be hard for some to believe that in the real world there really are evil, greedy people out to hurt, destroy, manipulate, and disenfranchise others, but there are. Just because there is an HBO sitcom about Mafiosi does not mean, unfortunately, that the Mafia is make-believe. Just because the news is reporting that SCO is threatening the very future of OSS, does not mean that they are making it up.
Eric Raymond, Linus Torvalds, Richard Stallman, and many others realize that this threat is large and real, and that is why they're responding so passionately. When the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, that was called "a day that will live in infamy." Was FDR drunk? Was he being melodramatic? No, he was inspired to say what he did, and that's why you still learn that speech in school today.
ESR's letter may not be the Gettysburg address, but it's got fire, and frankly, that's what you and the rest of this community need to get a little more of. If you did, maybe you'd stand up for yourselves and fight back.
Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
I think someone should shut him up...
...he needs to think about the results of what he says before he says it.
Really? It's not like he's shouting through a loud-speaker right into your ear, now, is it? ESR can say whatever he wants in any manner that suits him, as long as I still have a choice whether to pay him any attention.
My bet is that he either has throught it through (he isn't a dum-dum) or decided that it doesn't matter.
Healthcare article at Kuro5hin
There are three possibilities here.
One is to issue statements condemning SCO. That's the level where the FSF is at. See README.SCO in gcc 3.3.1 Here's a link.
README.SCO
Another possibility would be to remove support for SCO operating systems from FSF products, but leave the license alone. So people would be free to download the FSF source and maintain their own SCO versions of it.
A third possibility would be to change the license to restrict people and companies who act like SCO is acting.
The FSF is currently pursing action #1: including README.SCO files with its products. Personally, I am in favor of action #2: removing the SCO-specific code from FSF products.
This kind of ranting and raving is typical of the open source community. It is one of the reasons looks at open source with such a dubious eye. Most open source web sites you can point them to contain all sorts of unprofessional writing that makes them out to look like amateurs.
This is honestly not meant to be flamebait. I am in no way against open source. I just dislike the image the movement has because of people like ESR.
Forget the whales - save the babies.
You must be a democrat.
I'm a democrat, and I'm not anti-gun. (I don't own one myself, but I support your right to own one)
Most programmer, even with bad tempers don't write viruses; why should a gun nut with a bad temper be considered violent?
A computer, while it can certainly can be put to anti-social use, is not a tool of violence. Even in the worst circumstances it's highly unlikely that anyone will be injured or killed as a result of using a computer in anger.
A gun, on the other hand, has no other purpose than violence.
Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
I'm hearing this constant buzz, "Reason will prevail!"
I have some news for you folks. Not everyone can be reasoned with. Period. They are fanatics, lunatics, and criminals. The last thing on Darl McBride's mind is being reasonable.
So tell me, how do you reason with a person that refuses to listen to logic?
The answer?
You don't. You lock them in prison and throw away the key. Or you put a bullet in their head.
As for Darl McBride, I think prison is enough. As for Bin Laden and Hussein, well, you tell me.
Now. . . Back to the reasoning behind ESR's righteous indignation:
The problem with calm, reasoned rebuttals, is that Joe Sixpack is going to ignore it. It's boring. It's not Monday Night Football.
ESR is rightfully pissed off! And he has quite eloquently displayed that. He is making it absolutely clear how absurd he believes SCO's behavior is. And he's done it in such a way that it won't likely be ignored.
This is a battle over intellectual property and all we have to defend our position is words. So are we gonna drone out the usual, "Reason will prevail!" and hope it all magically comes out okay? Or are we gonna kick some ass?
Moekandu
"The object is not to bring you enemy to his knees, but his senses." - Ghandi
"Sometimes that requires a slap in the face." - Moekandu's Addendum
Mediocrity knows nothing higher than itself; but talent instantly recognizes genius. -- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
It looks like ESR's rant brought all the PHB's, english majors, prissy eti'cut types, and SCO/M$ shills out of the woodwork wrinkling their cute little noses selfrighteously scolding him.
ESR probably forgot more code that the whole damn bunch ever wrote.
The original parent post - that ESR should watch what he says - is dead on. Statements like
The time it takes a lackey to check with HQ for orders is time an ally can spend thinking up ways to make your life complicated that HQ would be too nervous to use. Go on, try to imagine an IBM lawyer approving this letter.
are not disagreement, they are easily construable as incitement and warning of some (illicit?) action against SCO (and its allies, perhaps including Microsoft and Sun?).
This is even worse:
Take that offer while you still can, Mr. McBride. So far your so-called 'evidence' is crap; you'd better climb down off your high horse before we shoot that sucker entirely out from under you.
What is that supposed to mean? I understand the anger Raymond feels, and it's shared by a whole lot of people. And clamor for SCO to show its cards - disagreement, rallying, FS/OS support - is obviously good. But threats, even veiled ones, are not.
A computer, while it can certainly can be put to anti-social use, is not a tool of violence. Even in the worst circumstances it's highly unlikely that anyone will be injured or killed as a result of using a computer in anger.
you will FOR SURE be killed or injured if i throw even a hard drive at yor head from my roof.
to say nothing of an entire tower and/or 21 inch monitor.
and thats not even the worst circumstance i can think of.
A gun, on the other hand, has no other purpose than violence.
no shooting ranges where you live?
i regularly have fun with my firearms.
all the while commiting no act of violence.
(unless all the poor broken bottles count)
Collecting data is only the first step toward wisdom. But sharing data is the first step toward community
...and RMS is a gnu nut!
Ba-dum, tish!
"Don't belong. Never join. Think for yourself. Peace." V.Stone, Microsoft Corporation
A gun, on the other hand, has no other purpose than violence.
Technically speaking, a gun's only purpose is to accelerate a small chunk of metal from it's chamber and through the barrel. Your purpose with a gun may be only violence, but my purpose with a gun is:
1: To easily enable me to provide food for my family.
2: To defend my family from whatever may threaten it.
3: To spend an enjoyable afternoon with my family, learning about morals, hand/eye coordination, safety, and self-defense by using a gun to poke high speed holes in tin cans.
For those who describe their systems as 'boxen', do you order multiple 'boxen' of corn flakes also?
Did Sequent have the same side letter ammendment to its Unix development license? Because some of the disputed code was written by Sequent who was bought by IBM. That code must be bound by Sequent's Unix development license, not IBM's.
I have not seen anything yet that claims that Sequent has any such ammendment. Still, even if the contract between Sequent and SCO obligates Sequent to not release any Unix derivative works, SCO will still need to convince a judge that code designed platform-independant, and then implemented on Unix, but which contains no Unix code, is a Unix derivative. I would call that an unknown, but that is just my opinion.
Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
Oh, wait ...
To make sure that the state did not drift into an official state religion (which invariably leads to problems) they put many safeguards into the USA constitution to keep the state and church seperate.
Quite false; the original intent of the First Amendment was not to guarantee the individual right to freedom of religious belief, but to guarantee the Federal government would not enforce a religious belief. Massachusetts had a state-sponsored church until the mid-1800s. It wasn't until the Fourteenth Amendment came along that the First Amendment was interpreted as a restriction on the states' authority to establish religion, as well as a restriction on the Federal government's.
While I'm very fond of the separation of church and state (and note, I'm a Christian), it does the goal of separation of church and state harm for people to throw about trivially-refuted nonsense like "the Framers put in many safeguards to keep the state and church separate". They did so only to the extent of keeping the Federal government and church separate. The more pervasive sense of separation is a post-Civil War addition.
Good points...
One which isn't mentioned much is damages. The courts which handle these types of case are, for the most part, not comprised of stupid officials. If this judge has any real sense of social justice, he would throw out the suit.
Assuming SCO won the case, then the burden is on them to demonstrate their financial losses. We all know it's a load of crap, but when you listen to Darl or Chris (Sontag) in an interview, they are provocative in their claim, as if it were some grand social injustice.
It's sickening when you read some articles with Darl McBride, and how money is at the foremost of this thinking. Here's a gem I bet most haven't read (from http://www.vnunet.com/Analysis/1141929
Darl McBride of SCO states: "Those guys [IBM] know what is going to come out in discovery, and you hear a lot of rumours on the street that they are going to buy us out. Well, I bet that's exactly what they want to do. The last thing they want to hear is the testimony that is going to come out."
Could you be more cocky than that? This jerk is so blindside with his conviction that IBM will buy them out, that you can practically see those dollar $igns bouncing in Darl's eye.
Here's another gem:
Chris Sontag stated: "What's at issue is that there is copyrighted Unix System V code, Version 4.1 code, copied into Linux. Whether it is used broadly or not [isn't relevant], it is widely published and available [...]"
The last time I checked, it did matter how broadly used it was because that is what will determine damages! DUHH!!!!
There's only one explanation, and that is these guys are thinking about cashout time. They know their jig is up, so they are stretching.
Absent of the greed these guys display, what people find most despicable about these guys is that they represent the worst of US executives. They are the stereotypical greedy executive personified. The outrage we are hearing is a positive reaction to a bad thing... let's not be so quick to condemn Eric's gut-acher response.
You can mod me down...
I must start using that in my comments. Worth at least +2 every time.
-- Free software on every PC on every desk
Rights are natural
rant follows
My pet peeve. Rights are not natural. They do not exist as a tangible thing.
They are a convenient legal fiction making writing rules (constitutions, laws and regs) easier.
Living with people means you lose privacy by them being able to see if you do or do not leave your home/hovel/tent.
Want me to go on?
Convenient yes. Good if everyone plays by them - probably. Natural no.
end rant
The Singularity is closer than you think
Quant
It's for exactly the same reason you choose the phrase "spittle-fringed invective": because you think it's a clever putdown.
And similarly with my response.
Now that SCO claims that everyone owes them for a kernel license, could all the people who worked on the kernel (And libc, and anything else that SCO's trying to steal) sue SCO for a slice of the pie or back wages? After all, if they're going to claim the right to your work, that must mean that you were working for them. I've seen farther fetched lawsuits win...
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Being a Canadian citizen, who tends to engage in political discussion, this is not all that surprising.
:-)
After reading a couple of your other comments, I've come to the understanding that a police officer threatened you with arrest. Well, I know the reasons the cop cited for having you arrested were all bullshit though. They're valid laws, just not likely in the context of the situation you were in.
I imagine this is more a case of a police officer being an asshole, power tripping, and just bluffing. (essentially what most cops I deal with are like)
I've had numerous run-ins with police officers who cite all kinds of random garbage just to justify their argument.
But, there would be no chance in hell that cop would actually arrest you for discussing private vs socialized health care debates. He'd find some sort of other random bullshit by-law to fine you with, but very unlikely to arrest you. Unless you were causing some sort of scene on private property and you were asked to leave.
But just for those Canadians here who might be reading this, and even disagreeing with my comments, here's just something to look at:
CBC documentary on Jaggi Singh who was kidnapped multiple times by RCMP officers who were informed by CSIS.
Covert Entry: Spies, Lies and Crimes Inside Canada's Secret Service
Bill C-36 is essentially Canada's "USAPATRIOT act".
And just as a final note, I don't trust cops in Canada or in America. Plus I'm not trying to make this into a Canada vs. America pissing contest of who has more/less rights. I equally dislike all nation states.
For those of you that flunked history, Nero had people killed for their personal beliefs. Now I'm not sure that this Judge is defying this order because of personal religious beliefs or because he believes the momument to be a historical treasure. I've seen people lay down in streets to prevent the destruction of old buildings because they had historical significance. For some reason, because this historical monument has "Right-wing Fundist" beliefs on it we should destroy it immediately. If it was a grinning Buddha, would you be so inclined to have it removed?
I guess I should explain this in a matter that geeks might better understand. I believe that I have the right to make backup copies of any DVD I own. The US government has decided it should be illegal for me to possess any software that allows me to make a backup.
If I make available a copy of DeCSS to you so you can do the same, I have committed a crime. I could go to court and lose (which you can bet I would lose, as I could not afford the expense). A judge could order that I take DeCSS off of my webpage and not make it available to anyone. If I did any way, because I truly believe you should be able to make a copy for personal use, I have committed a crime. Does that make me wrong?
I get tired of you AC's shouting out how awful Christians are because they have a belief system that says so-and-so is a sin. If you want to believe that you are right because you are a tolerant human being, who feels that condemning someone and making them take responsiblity for their actions is wrong, please feel free to do so. Guess what, no one is stopping you. Can you tell me one thing, before you flame, why are you so tolerant of others, but you curse and revile 'christians'?
Alex, I'm not trying to flame you, I'm trying to point out that because this Judge lost his case doesn't mean he feels he is any less in the right, than he was originally.
Vertical
72 CD D7 52 D0 7E D8 47 44 91 D5 84 D1 59 F1 A9-This is my 128bit integer. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
There's a multi-pronged approach being taken here. It's a mistake to think that ESR's words are to be taken as representative of what the whole community thinks, or that, perhaps, ESR himself even believes that his words are that representative.
If you want to fight a cause these days, you need more than one approach (eg: feminism (Steinhem & Guerilla Girls) or the black rights movement (MLK & Malcolm X)). That means you need to have lawyers (thanks IBM and Redhat), you need the zealots (thanks ESR and Stallman), and you need the calm charismatic types (thanks Linus) if you want to make sure that the widest possible audience is getting the message that it best understands.
ESR isn't ranting to get SCO shaking in its boots, he's ranting to rally the Linux community, ie: preaching to the choir. For those who don't really like that sort of thing, best to just ignore it as soapboxing and focus on what the lawyers or Linus are saying. That said, I'd like it if Linus spoke up a little more on it, or if the mega-media-corps were clamoring for his opinion more, but whatever.
--------
Bleah! Heh heh heh... BLEAH BLEAH!!! Ha ha ha ha...
and Open Sourse.
For the last several decades there was something
called Free Software: they authors of Linux, of
gcc, of bdb, af TeX, nad such things.
A few years ago someone (which limited capabilites
in C programming) decided to steal the work
of everyone and despite the objections of
Free Software authors (including RMS) decided
to rename it "Open Source" and declare himself
it leader. It is the linux version of McBbride,
a successfull McBride. His name is Eric R.
Nowdays the SCO Group declared war on the GPL
and Linux. Did you see RMS or Linus leading
the troops? No, nobody is representing noboby
in Free Software. But Eric Raymonds just took
the opportunity to represent the Kernel Developers,
the GPL loyalists, and declare that all orders
will come from Him. Now, *that* is the treat.
I don't allow Mr. Raymonds to represent me. Let's remember the words of a linux developer:
If RMS is a "nutso prophet," ESR is the televangelist version.
-- Henry Spencer
Did you ask Mr. Raymond if he was actually trying to make a point? Maybe he is just angry, tired of all this SCO crap, and fed up with all the buzz. He is also a human being, did you know?
But, even if you are right and he is trying to make a point, are you denying the others their sacred right to free speech? Think about it, man...
Greetings from Europe, the Land of Freedom.
Strength, balance, courage and reason. If you know what's this about, contact me!
While I agree with ESR in whole about everything, I think that the letter he wrote is unprofessional and reflects poorly upon him and the organization he represents.
He should have been much more tactful and judicious in his choice of words.
Sure, we're furious, we're pissed, we can rant in forums and the like but we should temper our words when putting them on official letterhead.
You can be sure that SCO will hold this up in the air like a gladiator holding up the severed head of his opponent in the arena.
SCO is a bunch of absolute morons but we should leave it to them to hold that status.
It's one thing when Joe Average rants and foams at the mouth but this looks bad.
And considering that SCO is blaming the recent DoS attacks on everyone they can think of, the wording of this letter and the timing of it and the attacks looks damning.
I would not even imply anything, but, SCO would.
We can't give in and lower ourselves to the tactics of the enemy. Our "leaders" must hold themselves up as shining examples as the best of the best, not the pissed of the pissed.
Yeah, I wish all the ill will in the world on SCO but I wouldn't be saying that on letterhead if I was the head of an organization that is under scrutiny. This ESR letter *WILL* be admitted as evidence when this stupid crap finally makes it to trial. Count on that..
I love a good rant! And, in spite of some over-the-top imagery, he's right.
But Officer, I DID read the f**king article!
I think it clear by now that SCO believes that Linux IS THEIRS. I think all here know this not to be true.
How could SCO hold this opinion? I think by believing that the portions of the source that is in their source tree (by whatever means) and in anyway similar in the Linux tree means that their copyrights give them rights. Either the GPL is meaningless (because of the supposed copyright violations) or that the GPL protects them wherever the copyright violations don't.
Now, a question. Is this true? Does GPL protect them where their own (supposed) copyright doesn't?
I guess to the point, the GPL doesn't replace or interfere with a person's copyright, does it? If it doesn't, and I believe it doesn't, does this not mean that if SCO believes it can ignore the GPL, they MUST get copyrights from each and every individual author? And if they don't, aren't they guilty of the very same copyright violations they accuse others of doing?
I think it is a matter of atomicity. How small a change can be covered under copyright? The source to Linux is a joint collaboration of thousands of authors, with the potential for any single source file to be authored by dozens or more authors. How does copyright handle collections from multiple authors?
Another question of atomicity: Is the GPL an all-or-nothing license? Or will it support the supposed SCO idea, where what is theirs is theirs and what is not theirs is theirs by the GPL? Or, as I hope, if you violate the GPL anywhere, it no longer provides you with rights at all, and the nightmare situation (for SCO) where you must get each author's copyright permission separately.
If this is the case, where the GPL either covers you or it doesn't, with atomicity at the very largest level, then can we get a cease and desist order against SCO about saying that Linux is anything but the community's property?
And further, that unless they comply with the GPL, and so be covered under the rights granted therein, or get each copyright holder's permission to use their changes, that they cease-and-desist shipping any parts of Linux that they have not received copyright permissions to ship.
I was going to ask the FSF, or someone who might understand the GPL better than I, about how the GPL works legally with the above in mind. However, this issue is bigger than just the GPL, because if the GPL isn't upheld, then EACH author's copyrights are being violated, which is an issue for the larger community.
If the above is true, who can we get to slap these cease-and-desist orders on SCO?
Tired of the SCO quagmire....
Shannon Mann
A comment overheard in a corn field `If you have better ideas, lets hear them. I am all ears.'
It's nice to see you've thought about it, though.
oh brave new world, that has such people in it!
no shooting ranges where you live?
i regularly have fun with my firearms.
all the while commiting no act of violence.
(unless all the poor broken bottles count)
Just because nobody cares about your target doesn't make it a non-violent act.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not condeming it! I've certainly done plenty of violent, destructive things that did no harm to people or property, and I think that can be a very important outlet at times, but I don't delude myself about the nature of what I'm doing.
Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
Hurray for bullshit semantics!
Technically speaking, a hydrogen bomb's only purpose is to release a large amount of energy over a very short period of time. Your purpose with an h-bomb may be to destroy population centers, but my purpose with an h-bomb is:
1: To remove unwanted islands.
2: To create jobs by opening naval positions.
3: To promote world peace by reducing the number of naval vessels.
Even if you use your gun to shingle your roof like the guy in that Far Side cartoon, that doesn't change the fact that the purpose of a gun is violence. That is it's intended use, and it's reflected in every one of the examples you give.
Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.