Slashdot Mirror


SCO Roundup

Time to clear out the bin of the taint of SCO, hopefully we haven't posted these already... The Economist has a piece titled Face Value -- Of Monkeys and Penguins. The EFF is pushing an email campaign about SCO. An anonymous reader submits this completely unverified claim that SCO needs to change the password on their mail server: sco.txt. And another reader presents a theory about SCO's stock performance.

471 comments

  1. Whatabout paragraph 141? by G3ckoG33k · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I just read Rob and Eric's long, well-written rebuttal to SCO's complaint but missed any remarks from them on paragraph 141.

    To me, it seemed too important to be not commented. Has it been commented upon since?

    1. Re:Whatabout paragraph 141? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Has it been commented upon since?

      I think paragraph 141 has too many numbers in it.

      There, does that count?

    2. Re:Whatabout paragraph 141? by EvilAlien · · Score: 5, Informative
      There is still no comment, but I think the comments to 140 say it all. DYNIX is not relevant here, given that it is based on the BSD lineage: "DYNIX developed at Sequent years ago was derived from BSD 4.1 with patches from 4.2 and new code by Sequent".

      The precedent set in the Berkeley v AT&T decision counters much of SCO's mindless spew. I got the idea that by the time Rob and Eric got to that point in the rebuttal that they got sick of repeating the same point over and over again, resulting in comments becoming sparser.

      Can somebody just hand Halloween IX to the appropriate judges so they can dismiss this thing already and focus on IBM's counterclaims? hehe Stupid SCO.

      --
      perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5, (41*2), sqrt(7056), (unpack(c,H)-2), oct(115), 10)'
    3. Re:Whatabout paragraph 141? by Tsu+Dho+Nimh · · Score: 2, Informative

      Para 141 merely establishes that Sequent has an agreement with whover was the vendor du jour of UNIX, and makes a claim about the terms of theocntract ... Rob and Eric are only commenting on those parts where they have knowledge and expertise, not on the interpretation of contracts.

      IBM's reply says it all:
      141 Denies the averments of paragraph 141, except refers to the referenced document for its contents. [that's legalese for "that copntract don't mean what you claim it means]
      142 Denies the averments of paragraph 142. [legalese for "we'll take about this in court, and not sooner"]

  2. My sig... by Knunov · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...should be McBride's mantra.

    --
    Why do users with IDs under 100,000 or over 700,000 usually have the most worthwhile comments?
  3. Yes, I posted this story yesterday by heironymouscoward · · Score: 5, Informative

    and it was rejected.

    I'm not grousing.

    The Economist has captured the issue very well, and in a way that any businessman (your boss, your clients, for instance) will understand.

    It has also defined the core of this issue, namely the realignment of the IT industry from old to new, with SCO/MS on the old side, and IBM/OSS/Linux on the new.

    I never thought I would see IBM on the right side of IT, but there we have it.

    --
    Ceci n'est pas une signature
    1. Re:Yes, I posted this story yesterday by Soko · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I never thought I would see IBM on the right side of IT, but there we have it.

      All as it takes is one sanguine person to turn the tide. Remember that.

      (I read about one OSS advocate who @IBM who caught the attention of Mr. Gerstner. That was when I was sober...)

      Soko

      --
      "Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm." - Anonymous
    2. Re:Yes, I posted this story yesterday by mcgroarty · · Score: 4, Informative
      and it was rejected.

      When they do roundup postings, they'll typically reject all of the original articles (or all but one) and save a few lines out of each submission.

    3. Re:Yes, I posted this story yesterday by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I'm not grousing.

      They why did you bring it up?

    4. Re:Yes, I posted this story yesterday by heironymouscoward · · Score: 1

      They why did you bring it up? :) You got me there. OK, it was a grouse, but only a small one serving as an excuse to repeat what I'd said in my story submission, namely that The Economist's analysis of the whole affair was very reasonable and satisfactory, and that this was an excellent sign for Linux's future.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas une signature
    5. Re:Yes, I posted this story yesterday by yukster · · Score: 1

      Don't feel bad... I submitted the link to the EFF email campaign and was rejected. I suppose it doesn't really matter, as long as the word gets around and people do it!

      Ya hear that everyone?? Git to it!

  4. sco.txt by Jailbrekr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you feel like lowering yourself to their level, keep that sco.txt link there.

    I thought the whole point was to take the high road?

    --
    Feed the need: Digitaladdiction.net
    1. Re:sco.txt by miknight · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I agree, we all know that we can beat them using ethical and legal means - we shouldn't give them (more?) anti-linux-community firepower.

    2. Re:sco.txt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought the whole point was to take the high road?

      You must be new here.

    3. Re:sco.txt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You guys are arguing for ethics on a site where at least half the visitors think downloading music on the internet is justified because the recording companies charge too much.

      Well, it is nice to know that Slashdot gets some new blood now and again...

    4. Re:sco.txt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I thought the whole point was to take the high road?
      I thought the whole point was to report about "News for Nerds," and if SCO's mail server is compromised, I'd say that qualifies (as would the owning of any major company's server). For the time being, linking to potentially criminal material* is not itself a crime, save for perhaps DeCSS.

      Though I do have to say, your comment about morality seems kind of funny coming from a guy whose nick is "Jailbrekr."

      *This assumes that SCO's mail server was cracked, and that the sco.txt is not fiction, or the doing of a user with legitimate access.
    5. Re:sco.txt by Tony-A · · Score: 1

      We?
      You have a disparate mob here running the gamut from *BSD partisans down to us Windows users who find /. indespensible for keeping up with the latest in Microsoft wormage. (And a few astroturfers thrown into the brew;)
      SCO does not get to do battle on just one front. It would be wrong for the linux-community to attack SCO's servers, but I would strongly suspect that its not the linux-community or even some individuals in it that are doing the attacking. SCO has a lot of enemies and a habit of being nasty with its friends. Methinks that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" does not apply here.

    6. Re:sco.txt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought the whole point was to report about "News for Nerds," and if SCO's mail server is compromised, I'd say that qualifies (as would the owning of any major company's server).

      SCO is hardly a major company.

    7. Re:sco.txt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought the whole point was to take the high road?

      Maybe the idea is to advertise the Honeypot?

      If I knew loads of 31337 H4X0rz were coming after me, I'd be tempted to put one up.

      Maybe SCO's security suxors. Maybe not. Does anyone really know?

    8. Re:sco.txt by hkmwbz · · Score: 1

      No, but it is a major pain in the ass to the Linux community.

      --
      Clever signature text goes here.
    9. Re:sco.txt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I thought the whole point was to take the high road?
      The whole point of what?

      Oh wait, the question mark means you're asking whether you thought that, so even you don't know what you're thinking, so there's no point asking for clarification.

    10. Re:sco.txt by shaitand · · Score: 1

      It's SCO who would like to keep the battles in the courtroom. This is war. You can fight like the english if you wish in the colonies, you can form two lines like a "gentleman". Or you get with it and start breaking the rules and fighting dirty gorilla warfare. England refusing to reduce themselves to the level of the colonists lost them a parcel of land that spawned a new nation which currently dominates the world.

      I haven't considered attacking SCO's site and servers personally. But I hardly condemn those who do, every day their servers are down costs them $$$ and eats their reserves. The less money they have the less time they'll have to finance their attack.

      This is war, if you wish to remain civilized by all means enjoy your notions. But being civil has no business in a war. The courts of no nation have juristiction here, this is the digital and cyber world. The authority of those lauching attacks and defending against them supercedes that of any physical government. THIS world was built and is run by hackers (both those who build, and crackers who attack), it is they who are in charge here.

      You can say the corporate world pays for the servers, that's fine and dandy, but it'd be hard to do that if nobody had the knowledge to build the infrastructure they bought, to deploy it, and to administer it.

    11. Re:sco.txt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The courts of no nation have juristiction here, this is the digital and cyber world. The authority of those lauching attacks and defending against them supercedes that of any physical government. THIS world was built and is run by hackers (both those who build, and crackers who attack), it is they who are in charge here.

      There is an 18 year old 31337 cyberpunk in Hopkins Minnesota (who was behind of the recent worm releases) who probably thought the same way you do, right up until the FBI slapped the bracelets on him a couple of days ago and hauled his sorry butt off to court. Chances are he will lose all of his computer equipment, go to prision for several years, and be banned from going near a computer or the internet like Mitnik was.

      You should check with an attorney before you engage in any hacking to understand the risks. The laws have become considerably harsher over the last several years, and you might be in for a rude shock someday.

      This is a round about way of telling you that you are dead wrong and you test your faulty beliefs and assumptions at your own considerable risk.

    12. Re:sco.txt by shaitand · · Score: 0

      There was a punk teenage country on the other side of the water that didn't feel it was right for outsiders to lord over everything THEY worked for in their own land. Some of them were arrested and even executed before they finally won their independence. Now what they fought for has become the most powerful nation in the world.

      Just because they have guns and power doesn't make their authority legitimate.

  5. You know you're in deep water... by NetRanger · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...when the EFF is coming after you. The EFF is not light-handed on the legal representation side, and if they're coming down on the side of Linux against SCO, then SCO has problems.

    What I want to see happen, however, is an injunction that holds all funds paid for "Linux licenses" in an escrow account until this matter is settled permanently.

    --
    -- We live in a world where lemonade is artificial and soap has real lemon.
    1. Re:You know you're in deep water... by screenrc · · Score: 1
      Really? Until SCO provides proof, they are
      irrelevent.


      After all, we cannot collect money and hold it
      for 3 years every time some idiot just claim anything
      they want. SCO must demonstrate liability
      for damages (not just ownership) before they
      see a dime.

    2. Re:You know you're in deep water... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually I think EFF is pretty ineffective.

      They never really won any important cases.

      Sure they helped out Lessigs career on the lecture circuit and spent a lot of donation money traveling from SF to DC but as far as actually doing something? nah...not really...

    3. Re:You know you're in deep water... by smallpaul · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The EFF is not light-handed on the legal representation side, and if they're coming down on the side of Linux against SCO, then SCO has problems.

      Would you rather go up against the EFF's lawyers or IBM's lawyers?

    4. Re:You know you're in deep water... by AftanGustur · · Score: 3, Insightful


      Would you rather go up against the EFF's lawyers or IBM's lawyers?

      IBM lawyers will hit you with the legal system.

      EFF lawyers will hit you with the justice system.

      Being hurt by loads of lawyers and financial punishment hurts, but being defeated by justice, is something very painful and difficult to recover form.

      --
      echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb572CCB9AE9DB03273snlbxq' |dc
    5. Re:You know you're in deep water... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't the SCO going against both, actually ?

      Kinda reminds me of how Germany picked a fight with the USA and the Soviet Union at the same time...

    6. Re:You know you're in deep water... by Larsing · · Score: 1

      being defeated by justice, is something very painful and difficult to recover form

      The very thought of a blindfolded woman waving a sword is painful enough to keep me away...

      --
      Ethics is what you say you do. Morals is what you actually do.
  6. Interesting by Alizarin+Erythrosin · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Even though SCO hates Linux and the GPL, if that text file of their server shell is true:

    mail:/usr/share # hostname -f; uname -a
    mail.sco.com
    Linux mail 2.4.19-64GB-SMP #1 SMP Fri Feb 7 16:29:22 UTC 2003 i686 unknown

    They run Linux... SMP version even. So I guess Linus can sue them for copyright infringement if they won't follow the GPL? Assuming this is a valid text log. Would a Netcraft report count as evidence?
    --
    There are only 10 kinds of people in this world... those who understand binary and those who don't
    1. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      They can't be sued for running GNU/Linux. The GPL doesn't cover use, only modification and distribution.

    2. Re:Interesting by IamNotWitchboy · · Score: 1, Informative

      But the whole point is that they are not protected by the GPL because they openly rejected it.

      There is a clause in the GPL that states that you can refuse to accept the license, in which case it turns into a copyright infringment.

      pretty neat, uh?

      --
      The best cure for insomnia is realizing that it is already time to get up. EsteEncanto.com - Blog on technology, urban
    3. Re:Interesting by screenrc · · Score: 1
      And SCO can be sued by their customers who
      bought SCO products under the GPL (that was
      SCO's choice of license) sinse they claim that
      GPL is invalid. The GPL was the contract between
      SCO and customers. In other words, SCO refuses
      to honor the contract they signed with their customers.

    4. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
      No, only distribution becomes copyright infringement. This still means that SCO is in trouble, but it has absolutely nothing to do with their running Linux, but distributing it.

      Just as a reminder:


      5. You are not required to accept this License, since you have not
      signed it. However, nothing else grants you permission to modify or
      distribute the Program or its derivative works. These actions are
      prohibited by law if you do not accept this License. Therefore, by
      modifying or distributing the Program (or any work based on the
      Program), you indicate your acceptance of this License to do so, and
      all its terms and conditions for copying, distributing or modifying
      the Program or works based on it.

    5. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They run Linux... SMP version even. So I guess Linus can sue them for copyright infringement if they won't follow the GPL?

      He can sue them for copyright infringement, but not because of this. Because they are redistributing Linux to end users. Remember you don't need permission from the GPL to simply USE Linux.

    6. Re:Interesting by fermion · · Score: 1
      Even though SCO hates Linux and the GPL

      They hate the GPL, they believe that Linux is a derivative of Unix and as such they own it. That is why they are asking licensing fees. The fact that they are bothering to create a licensing structure that allows people to use the Linux Kernel, rather than forcing people to switch to SCO products, indicated that they like Linux and may well hope that it becomes a revenue stream.

      This is not like MS running a GNU/Linux server or using GNU/Linux software. MS clearly promotes the concept that a shop must use only MS products, and their use of other product is hypocritical.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    7. Re:Interesting by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 1

      it has absolutely nothing to do with their running Linux, but distributing it.

      Acutally, it does.

      To use Linux requires that you copy it, from your hard drive to the ram in your computer.

      Therefore, SCO could legally keep a copy of the software on one single hard drive or floppy, tape, or whatever, but could not make a backup copy and could not actually load the software and run it.

      --
      If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
  7. Does this make Sense? by kb3edk · · Score: 5, Funny

    "SCO Stock Goes Up After SCOForum Code Revealed as Baloney... Does This Make Sense?"

    No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does not make sense.

    If Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must acquit! The defense rests.

    1. Re:Does this make Sense? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Chewbacca doesn't live on Endor, the ewoks lived on the forest moon of endor.

    2. Re:Does this make Sense? by stwrtpj · · Score: 5, Funny
      "SCO Stock Goes Up After SCOForum Code Revealed as Baloney... Does This Make Sense?"

      Hey, this gave me an idea. To really increase visibility of the whole case, maybe someone can get the Onion to do a feature article on it. Here's some suggested headlines:

      SCO to Sue God

      Darl McBride Caught in Bizarre Love Triangle With Bill Gates, Penguin

      Darl McBride to Rename Self Darth McBride, Builds Death Star

      SCO Accidentally Sues Self For 10 Billion

      Local Man Wonders What Is This SCO Shit

      SCO Enters Partnership With Gorzo the Mighty (subtitle: New Corporate Motto: "Seize Him!")

      Infinite Number of Monkeys Write UNIX, Sued by SCO

      --
      Karma: Frotzed (mostly due to the Frobozz Magic Karma Company)
    3. Re:Does this make Sense? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try googling for "Chewbacca Endor acquit", genius.

    4. Re:Does this make Sense? by CPM+User · · Score: 1

      Price of crack cocaine to rise on October 15th, computer company acts.

    5. Re:Does this make Sense? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SCO Enters Partnership With Gorzo the Mighty (subtitle: New Corporate Motto: "Seize Him!")

      I think we have a winner!

    6. Re:Does this make Sense? by TitaniumFox · · Score: 1

      Considering my .sig, I like the last one...

      --
      -- I'd say your post was about 3 monkeys, 18 minutes.
  8. Perception of linux crowd at issue possibly by gaber1187 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What this tells me is that maybe business folks/investors think the Linux/open source community is sort of just a group of whiners and will always be dogging SCO no matter what. Although SCO seems to be clearly just looking for a buyout offer and the execs, a runup in stock price, I think this tells me that maybe we need to start trying to be a little more objective so that we can get more respect from the people with lotsa money... I'll believe it when I see a posting on Slashdot that says, "newest version of redhat sucks" or something to that effect... :-)

    1. Re:Perception of linux crowd at issue possibly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I'll believe it when I see a posting on Slashdot that says, "newest version of redhat sucks" or something to that effect... :-)
      Do you mean a headline posting or a comment?

      I mean, I think RedHat sucks because that's what other people say...
      I think I heard IBM say that one time, and since they're my guide to life, you know I have to believe it...
    2. Re:Perception of linux crowd at issue possibly by rking · · Score: 1

      I'll believe it when I see a posting on Slashdot that says, "newest version of redhat sucks" or something to that effect... :-)

      I guess you missed that whole Bluecurve flamewar. Even excluding that, finding people criticising Red Hat on Slashdot has never been hard.

    3. Re:Perception of linux crowd at issue possibly by dnoyeb · · Score: 1

      How did you reach that conclusion? The open tech community is blasting SCO as well as the open investment community. So the business community cant just listen to one. Its price manipulation from Market Makers, and day traders.

    4. Re:Perception of linux crowd at issue possibly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      YOU MUST BE NEW HERE! :-)

      Evidentally, you have missed all kinds of things, such as:

      "Red Hat is the Microsoft of the Linux world..."

      et cetera, ad infinitum

    5. Re:Perception of linux crowd at issue possibly by gaber1187 · · Score: 1

      The specialist for the company only raises the price if he can get buyers. If the price is high and people are selling shares back to SCO, they lose money. So the price goes up when more people are buying shares from SCO than selling. So somebody is buying. So I tend to agree that the main culprit of the stock run-up is the hedge fund analyst trying to make a buck before SCO goes down for good. This just tells you not to listen to the talking heads on TV. All that said, what I'm mostly referring to is that if you watch reports about SCO, they seem to be saying that its just business as usual for this and other companies to go after people for their Intellectual Property--which of course is pretty common. However, just like most cases, investors look to various sources to interpret the validity of the claims. If they look to press releases from the company only they are dumb, but if they then decide to look at the stock price and a then do a search on the internet about SCO, they are bound to find the open source crowd talking about the issue. So they have to weight their decision on their view of each source and decide if tv, stock price, or linux crowd is right. Well, the problem is that in this case, that the linux crowd IS affected greatly, so we are not objective. All this brings up to me is that what if the general opinion of the linux/open source community by business folks is that we are all just pro linux and anti microsoft zealots that don't want to pay for anything. As long as that is a perception, they will probably discount a number of our arguments. I guess I should have said, once linux is better than windows then we won't look so much like fanatics, but smart to the managerial types. I just hope that we don't act a certain way that makes business people with little knowledge of linux think we are fanatics and our opinions can't be trusted.

    6. Re:Perception of linux crowd at issue possibly by dnoyeb · · Score: 1

      SCO does not sell shares, they float them. Same thing I suppose, but its only done on certain occasions. Not on a daily basis. They have not floated any shares in a while, but they have handed out a lot of stock-options which is practically the same thing.

      And as far as a specialist goes, the NASDAQ does not use a specialist but Market Makers. They are not as disciplined, thats why NASDAQ stocks are wildly volatile sometimes.

      I agree with the rest of what you said though.

  9. Ahh....my fix... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There and I was starting to get withdrawal...

    What the hell will I do with my time when SCO is finally buried?

    1. Re:Ahh....my fix... by macshune · · Score: 1

      Go back to the old standby...hard-A

  10. This thread is ? SCO sux? SCO is a clown? by westyvw · · Score: 0

    What am I supposed to say here that hasnt been said a million times? Is this any new insight that scos stocks are rising for no apparent (until you dig then you know) reason?

    Commies? Is that how he views us Linux users? Well in this current environment he better watch out we commies turn into vigilante mob pretty quickly. I mean no physical threat at all, but we arent about to sit still and watch some lame ass company come at us.

    The best thing I can say is an old quote:
    "The cats out of that bag" and it aint going back in. Linux is here to stay.

    1. Re:This thread is ? SCO sux? SCO is a clown? by westyvw · · Score: 0

      "that bag"? WTF isnt that THE BAG? You moron. Get things straight. What are you doing? Learning lessons from SCO?

    2. Re:This thread is ? SCO sux? SCO is a clown? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Well in this current environment he better watch out we commies turn into vigilante mob pretty quickly.
      I can see the headline now: "Mob of geeks pillages SCO headquarters"
      I saw the disclaimer, but honestly, can't you see this happening?

      If SCO makes another buck off of Linux, I'm ready. ;-)
    3. Re:This thread is ? SCO sux? SCO is a clown? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Demonstrating once again that evil-hearted corporations can act with impunity, knowing they have little to fear from "vigilante mobs" of geeks who can't take two steps without falling apart into a chaos of spelling and grammar flames and namecalling.

    4. Re:This thread is ? SCO sux? SCO is a clown? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      ...chaos of spelling and grammar flames and namecalling.
      Hey, isn't that a run-on sentence?

      Surely you maen:
      ...chaos of namecalling, spelling and grammar flames.
      Oh wait, that doesn't mean quiet the same thing...

      (I tried to make spelling and grammar mistakes, but I didn't succeed so well what with all the simple words).

      I know you are, but what am I?
    5. Re:This thread is ? SCO sux? SCO is a clown? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (Well, your post actually did contain a grammatical error. You see, full sentences enclosed within a set of parentheses are punctuated in full within said parentheses.)

    6. Re:This thread is ? SCO sux? SCO is a clown? by screenrc · · Score: 1
      For one, contrary to what most people might believe, you
      don't need a reason for a stock to rise. But
      let's not focus on this.


      Ok, you really need a reason (to make you feel
      better?) How about SCO is now a profitable
      company due to Macrosoft? How about that they
      are in the fuding business and they are doing
      a good job? And if they keep doing well, they
      will get more Microsoft money in 2004 .


      You people are concentrating on the trial! Despite
      of the cute articles in Newspapers, the trial
      is not the main issue. The main issue the new anti-competitive
      practices of Micrsoft who are set to raise the
      cost of doing business for Linux companies , and preferable distroy
      the upcoming threat of Linux and the GPL. So
      the hired SCO to do the fud job for them, whithout
      having to be exposed to huge liabilities for damages or
      get sued for anti-competitive practices.


      The SCO stories, in general, are cute stories for the simple minded.

    7. Re:This thread is ? SCO sux? SCO is a clown? by MuParadigm · · Score: 1


      Not quite true. A parenthetical sentence within a sentence should not be punctuated with a full stop. Only parenthetical statements *outside* of a sentence should receive a period.

      Otherwise, you are correct.

  11. Adapt and Succeeed by Farley+Mullet · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I never thought I would see IBM on the right side of IT, but there we have it.
    IBM is crafty, eh? The most charitable way of putting it is to say that they know how to adapt to changing business environments (although it might be more accurate to say that they have an almost supernatural sense which way the wind is blowing). Think about it: old alliances, like IBM-MS, are a thing of the past, with IBM being perhaps linux's greatest corporate benefactor, while old oppositions, like IBM-Apple, have evaporated, starting with the old AIM partnership, and now with IBM-made CPU's in the latest Macintoshes.
    1. Re:Adapt and Succeeed by Farley+Mullet · · Score: 2, Funny

      Uh, would you believe that the extra "e" is for "evolution"?

    2. Re:Adapt and Succeeed by weave · · Score: 1

      IBM was the last to enter the PC industry in 1981, so I don't see that as an example of adaption. Fortuantely for them, there were enough old-time IBM mainframe types around still that the PC took off on name-brand recognition and they lived on top of the pile until 1987 when they tried to halt the clone industry by tossing Microchannel machines onto the market and forever losing their dominance in the desktop machine world. (At least their introduction of the 3.5" disk helped kill the 5.25" floppy. True, HP, then Apple did it long before IBM, but when IBM did it, all the others quickly followed.)

    3. Re:Adapt and Succeeed by Syre · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, what happened with MicroChannel was that IBM tried to set a new standard, which actually was much better than the old PC-AT slot standard. It included automatic configuration of interrupts, better mechanical characteristics, etc.

      The problems were:
      a) IBM wanted to charge a rather high fee for anyone to license the new bus, both to clone manufacturers and to card manufacturers.
      b) Card manufacturers found it more expensive to make cards for the new bus, partly because the traces required for the slot contacts had such a tight tolerance requirement.

      This spurred the industry to create their own new standard, the VESA bus, which was then superceded when Intel successfully forced the industry to adopt the PCI bus. But that's another story.

    4. Re:Adapt and Succeeed by Anonym0us+Cow+Herd · · Score: 1

      This spurred the industry to create their own new standard, the VESA bus,

      The new standard bus was EISA, not VESA. (See a sibling post for links.) I remember these events well.


      IBM wanted to charge a rather high fee for anyone to license the new bus, both to clone manufacturers and to card manufacturers.

      IBM was disapointed that all the clones had come along and undercut them on price and established a thriving industry, while they were busy pushing mainframes and thinking that the PC was a toy.

      There was no way they could turn the clock back and seize control of the now common PC architecture made from standard off the shelf parts.

      So they decided to introduce a new architecture, with some benefits, so that everyone would be compelled to follow IBM's lead, and pay IBM huge royalties.

      The rest of the industry did thing that everyone was being encouraged to do at the time. "Just say NO." They went off and developed the EISA bus.

      IBM was left with the non-standard architecture, the PS/2. Eventually IBM abandoned this and re-joined the rest of the industry making IBM PC's that were industry standard.

      --
      The price of freedom is eternal litigation.
    5. Re:Adapt and Succeeed by msgmonkey · · Score: 1

      Whilst what you have wrote is all true, EISA did n't exactly become prevalent either (except in servers). The problem with VESA bus was that it was really only designed for graphics cards and not as a replacement for ISA. It became popular because it was cheap to implement and as mentioned worked along side the ISA bus.

    6. Re:Adapt and Succeeed by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      The key reason that nobody wanted to license MicroChannel from IBM is that not only did IBM want some fairly reasonable fees going forward, they wanted retroactive licensing fees on ISA-bus as part of the deal. So, the more ISA-bus products a company had manufactured in the past, the more expensive it was for them to license MicroChannel from IBM.

      That was stupid and arrogant of IBM. They got punched in the face for it. It appears that they learned from that experience. But stupidity reasserts itself all the time, especially when where is an entirely new generation of people in the ranks now, that corporate memory may not be strong enough to keep the stupid ones at bay.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    7. Re:Adapt and Succeeed by jwcollins · · Score: 1
      Actually, you are mistaken. The clone makers, led by Compaq, created and adopted the EISA (extended? industry standary architecture) bus. This was in the era of 386's. VESA came later as a way to get higher bandwidth to video cards in the 486 era.

      As you correctly note, PCI relegated both to the dustbin of history. Amen. --jwc

    8. Re:Adapt and Succeeed by cyberformer · · Score: 1

      It's not supernatural, just trial and (lots of) error. IBM was failing spectacularly in the late 1980s, its monopoly lost to Microsoft, but after several attempts it has been able to reinvent itself.

      IBM is basically a conglomerate, with each business unit often unaware of what the others are doing. Many employees are so wrapped up in their own departments that they don't know much about Linux, Windows or even computers at all (except for email: IBM has been using it internally for >20 years). This leads to some good (Linux), some evil (CPRM), some sound decisions (exiting the desktop business) and some things that just seem crazy (the apparent obsession with Grid Computing). I guess thats' a deliberate strategy: Do a lot of different things, and some will succeed.

    9. Re:Adapt and Succeeed by cbreaker · · Score: 1

      I would say that EISA was a lot LESS common then the Vesa Local Bus slots. I have a lot of PC Magazines of the time - they all advertised VLB slots, not EISA slots.

      EISA was used in the server arena for awhile, but for the common PC it was Vesa Local Bus slots. It was a much easier and cheaper way to pump more data to a device like a Video board.

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
    10. Re:Adapt and Succeeed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, the basic point is right. I realized in the mid-1990s that Linux was the Operating System analog to the ISA bus. While the MCA bus was *much better* than the ISA bus initially, it was the extra cost that was the problem - as well as the need to inform IBM of your making plug-compatible components for their PS/2's. All MCA bus cards had to be registered with IBM so that they could be authorised to be part of the auto-configuration process / needed a special code to activate the card once inserted in the machine. Don't play ball with IBM, and you can't make cards for their machines. Oh yes - anyone wanting to make MCA machines also needs to pay royalties for all previous ISA bus machines (at least this is what I remember). So the whole point was to have a big disincentive to compete with IBM, both whole PCs and adapter cards.

      What's even funnier is the SCO lawsuit is the equivalent today of IBM suing Compaq & Intel in the early 1990s because they had extended the ISA bus as EISA, and IBM should therefore be compensated for all EISA bus machines and cards. I say this because that didn't happen and for the same reason why SCO's suite will ultimately fail. IBM had initially "open sourced" the specifications for the 8 and 16-bit ISA bus architecture specifically to encourage the development of 3rd party cards. The MCA and the PS/2 design only came along when IBM realized that their control of the PC market was being cut by competition based on this "open source" design. Thus the MCA bus machines, which were "superior", because of the I/O capability of the MCA bus for such things as RAID cards, graphics processors, etc. were introduced to stem the tide of competition. The introduction of the EISA bus however addressed many of these shortcomings with the earlier ISA bus while still staying compatible. So EISA (which was a "group" standard, remember) won out over MCA mainly because the group was stronger (and cheaper) than the proprietary alternative. Sound familiar??

      From what I have read of the SCO statements, what they really object to is not the older Linux kernel versions that only scaled well on 2 CPUs, but the newer ones that have better memory management, can scale to 8 way, and be used for 64-bit CPUs as well. Like IBM facing EISA in the early 1990's, SCO are facing not an obsolete competitor but one that has been vastly improved for mainstream work. This is the real problem - Linux becoming a true "group" standard alternative to SCO's proprietary UNIX versions, just as EISA (and later PCI) superceded both the IBM ISA and MCA designs. And just as IBM suffered from its "open source" competition then in terms of declining PC market share, should SCO today be surprised that it's more proprietary and expensive alternatives to Linux are also losing favor with their traditional client base?

      It therefore seems somewhat ironic that SCO would be suing IBM over Linux, given the rather large sums of cash IBM lost to the PS/2-MCA "money pit". If IBM couldn't sue its competitors over something as tangible as hardware standards and designs that had a fairly clear lineage then, how could SCO possibly think they could sue about Linux now, given the rather Byzantine and fairly occult structure of UNIX's evolution?

      -- Mr. AC --

      PS: A footnote to the MCA saga. The initial target MCA machines for the PS/2 (the Models 50, 60, 70, and 80) were creatively engineered, but also interestingly hobbled. The Models 50 and 70, for example could not take MCA cards the size of the old ISA-16 cards from the AT-type machines; they also only had 90W power supplies. While the "tower" models 60 and 80 were bigger with larger power supplies, you still had to use the same cards as from the Models 50 and 70; thus all they were really good for were larger hard disks. As someone who used to shove up to 7 additional cards and extra drives into PC-AT's, (leveraging the AT's large chassis and 230W P/S) this seemed like a deliberate attempt to prevent PS/2s from doing things they weren't supp

    11. Re:Adapt and Succeeed by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 1

      I would say that EISA was a lot LESS common then the Vesa Local Bus slots. I have a lot of PC Magazines of the time - they all advertised VLB slots, not EISA slots.

      But Eisa outlived the VESA bus. After PCI came in the VESA bus wasn't needed any more because PCI was fast enough[1]. But it didn't cost much to throw an Eisa slot or two onto a motherboard beside the PCI slots since they also handle ISA cards. Lots of manufacturers did, and I'm still running a machine today with PCI and Eisa slots in it. I never did see an Eisa card in one of my machines though.

      [1] When graphics bandwith outgrew the PCI bus, AGP was devised, filling much the same role as VESA did.

      --
      Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
    12. Re:Adapt and Succeeed by Syre · · Score: 1

      OOPS

      You're right. It was EISA.

      I had a memory glitch. Sorry.

      VLB followed a couple of years later.

    13. Re:Adapt and Succeeed by cbreaker · · Score: 1

      Maybe we live in different parts of the world or something.

      I never saw an EISA slot on anything but machines like old Compaq servers. The only cards I ever saw plugged into them were NICs and SCSI controllers.

      I saw VLB slots on every PC out there, with Video boards, NICs, and everything else plugged into them. The most common VLB boards out there were Video Boards, but that rings true for any high speed bus.

      Since VLB slots are a slot extension on ISA slots as well, you could slap them on a board with PCI/ISA slots too. I have a few 486 boards in the closet with VLB-ISA and PCI slots.

      AGP is indeed superior to PCI for graphics, but it's only good for graphics. VLB and EISA were general purpose slots like PCI.

      Overall I'm sure glad that PCI was standardized and used for this long. The time period of the VLB/ISA/PCI/EISA slots sucked. Too many different types of slots and boards to go with them. Let us hope that the next standard bus lasts just as long, or longer.

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
  12. root:6X7liA1zmJhyA:12255:0:10000:::: by delirium+of+disorder · · Score: 4, Funny

    the1:/home/the1# john sco.shadow Loaded 1 password (Standard DES [24/32 4K]) guesses: 0 time: 0:00:00:20 (3) c/s: 5150 trying: 1951 - stanney guesses: 0 time: 0:00:00:22 (3) c/s: 4688 trying: stephes - sunnette guesses: 0 time: 0:00:00:24 (3) c/s: 4334 trying: samart - bunny guesses: 0 time: 0:00:00:26 (3) c/s: 4021 trying: 1182 - carison guesses: 0 time: 0:00:00:46 (3) c/s: 3196 trying: chammen - mady157 . . .

    --
    ------ Take away the right to say fuck and you take away the right to say fuck the government.
    1. Re:root:6X7liA1zmJhyA:12255:0:10000:::: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      with or without that "..."? :)

    2. Re:root:6X7liA1zmJhyA:12255:0:10000:::: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been John the Ripper for a very long time, but I can't see what's so funny about this.

      Can anyone explain this one to me?

      Or is everyone just laughing because his "combinations per second" is ridiculously slow?

    3. Re:root:6X7liA1zmJhyA:12255:0:10000:::: by delirium+of+disorder · · Score: 1

      Yes that is the output from a pentium box, but who says I'm not trying other wordlists on other machines?

      --
      ------ Take away the right to say fuck and you take away the right to say fuck the government.
    4. Re:root:6X7liA1zmJhyA:12255:0:10000:::: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What, pentium 75? This p3/600 i'm testing on does 65,000, and it's still old.

      tried it on a p4/2.53, 165k/s

  13. Re:Warm up that password cracker? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone run crack on that yet. I wanna know if the root password is "k00lDarl". Or more likely, "Darlsuxx".

    Of course you probably shouldn't post it if they haven't fixed it yet. Better check first (er, I mean, don't do that). For that matter, did the Czech poster mean to imply that they were able to log in directly as root from a remote site?

  14. Quick question. by cliffy2000 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I'm considering short-selling SCOX stock on Tuesday. Bad idea? Good idea? Thoughts, please. I don't particularly feel like blowing through more money on the market.

    1. Re:Quick question. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then you probably shouldn't try to short SCO, or anything else.

    2. Re:Quick question. by burnin1965 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Bad idea.

      When reading all available information from both sides it appears that SCO has a weak case against linux (I am biased, but com'on, non-sensicle statements, back pedaling, inconsistencies, the only evidence shown has been refuted with facts not with "our word against theirs").

      With that in mind you might think that shorting their stock would be a good way to make some quick bucks. But beware.

      If these people are as deceitful as they appear then there is a high likelihood that they are manipulating the stock price by any means possible.

      And if that is the case normal logic will not hold. If you short and they start to play some of their manipulation tricks you will lose big time.

      IANAFA but that is my financial opinion.

      burnin

    3. Re:Quick question. by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      And if that is the case normal logic will not hold. If you short and they start to play some of their manipulation tricks you will lose big time.
      IANAFA but that is my financial opinion.


      And great advice at that. I was really thinking of playing this game back in June, but changed my mind when it became obvious that things were not matching up to what was being said.
      If you play, you need to know the rules and right now the only ones who know the rules are SCO, Canopy Group, MS, and Sun.
      Offhand, I seriously doubt that those investment groups have a clue about what they have bought or the rules.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    4. Re:Quick question. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I don't particularly feel like blowing through more money on the market.
      Then take the smart money and get out of the short term market like I and many others did. Being "Mr. Stock Trader" was fun for awhile back when everyone was dripping with VC. I made thousands off RedHat's stock, and as a nice brag, I initiated both the buy and the sell while sitting in Unix class at college (the trades were several weeks apart). In 2001 I acted on a bad tip and lost quite a bit. I haven't made a day trade since, though I still have several long term holdings.

      If you aren't comfortable with the risk, then don't take the chance. I quit being comfortable after losing "big" (i.e. in the thousands of dollars, as opposed to a hundred or two here and there when a stock didn't go the way I thought it would). Wall Street rule number one is that you don't invest money that you can't afford to lose or wouldn't be comfortable losing. It sounds like you aren't OK with the possibility of owing your broker for a short gone bad. Trust your gut, which is telling you that it sounds risky, because it is risky.

      It's likely that you won't find [m]any shares of SCOX available to be shorted anyway. Several brokerages have already added SCOX to the "cannot be shorted" list, and with thousands of people out there wanting to short this particular security, your chances of getting a) in and b) rich are both very low.

      If you want to stay in the market, look at the long term. I'd avoid MSFT, but IBM probably wouldn't hurt. AOL is probably a bad place to put your cash now, but AAPL has been a good long term investment for me. Ignore what might be happening in the next few weeks or even months, and extend your outlook to several years from now. This is not a bull market anymore.

      Shorting is risky to begin with, just as much so as trading on margin. Shorting a volatile security such as SCOX, which sees fairly significant spikes and dips from day to day depending on the spin-du-jour, is far riskier. Slashdot is probably not the best place to get investment advice, but since you asked, I've given my opinion. Stay away from SCOX.
  15. Who cares??? by Mrs.+Grundy · · Score: 5, Insightful
    "We're absolutely not going away, and they're not giving up, so we got a big problem," says Mr McBride.

    I imagine he is using 'we' in the royal sense meaning 'he.' It's a little shocking to me that so many people are devoting so much time to this. Wouldn't we be better off to just ignore him and let IBM squash him and his claim unnoticed as a something as unsubstantiated as his is should be.

    Instead we spend an awful lot of time and energy talking and reading...and making SCO a household word. And worse, making people nervous about linux and open source software in general for (so far) no reason at all. This seems to be a guy who likes to make his money suing people and is getting some free publicity at everyone's expense. Until they are willing to pony up with some real evidence let them slither back to the obscurity more fitting companies that have nothing good to offer.

    1. Re:Who cares??? by DASHSL0T · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you don't fight back against them, who is there to counter their FUD? It is bad enough the "trade media" isn't giving their claims a critical look, you want the people (us geeks) to shut up and ignore them too?

      Then nobody will be speaking out against their frivilous claims. Surely that is a Bad Thing (tm).

      --
      Freedom Is Universal
      Linux-Universe
    2. Re:Who cares??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Time for a little history lesson:
      1) Ignore [insert fanatical leader here]'s threats
      2) Ignore rogue countries incursions on neighbors
      3) Ignore the invasion of that continent
      4) Kill scores of people to take out said leader
    3. Re:Who cares??? by Badanov · · Score: 1
      Instead we spend an awful lot of time and energy talking and reading...and making SCO a household word.

      Give it a rest. I am an SCO /. news junkie. I can't help myself. I am addicted! Please, just one more hit of SCO news. Just one more, please?

      --
      Dawn of the Dead
    4. Re:Who cares??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Uh, you care.
      You want everyone to ignore it, except you? You're even spending time and energy talking about it.

      You could always turn off the Caldera catagory and see very little talk about SCO.

    5. Re:Who cares??? by gilesjuk · · Score: 1

      If we don't dismiss the SCO claims then those looking to adopt or those who have adopted Linux will feel isolated and unsure about the licensing. Such people will probably buy the license from SCO if they feel the claims are valid.

    6. Re:Who cares??? by achurch · · Score: 1

      Instead we spend an awful lot of time and energy talking and reading...and making SCO a household word.

      And giving Linux more attention at the same time. If (let's be optimistic: when) SCO is shown the door, most of the uncertainty this entire series of incidents has generated should go away--leaving the impression of a huge player in the IT industry, namely IBM, putting their full weight behind Linux. And that's something your PHB can comprehend: "IBM's doing Linux, why shouldn't we?"

  16. SCO site down again!? by aaron240 · · Score: 1

    Do you suppose they're doing some preventative maintenance? Anyone care to fill us in on the fun they're having with that sco.txt file?

  17. it was interesting at some point... by infonick · · Score: 4, Insightful

    but after months of this SCO bullplop... I wonder why i am up at 12:57 in the morning reading this stuff. is it just me, or has development on this story slowing down?

    --

    You are confusing me with someone who cares.
    1. Re:it was interesting at some point... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you kidding? We're just getting started. Keep your eye's peeled so you don't miss:

      * SCO views high-resolution pictures of Mars.. after careful study of the ice cap, a frustrated McBride proclaims "our intellectual property has been misappropriated by Communist Mars forces!"

      * SCO sues a small company that uses Linux.. turns out Microsoft owns it.. hilarity ensues!

      * Darl McBride found drunk and covered with the semen of 6 different men at the steps of a gay bar in Detroit. Insists that he was framed. Coincidence? Or part of the Linux conspiracy against him?

      * SCO views high-resolution pictures of Mars.. after careful study of the ice cap, a frustrated McBride proclaims "our intellectual property has been appropriate by Communist Mars forces!"

      * Steve McQueen stars as a tough, system-bucking software company CEO who's assigned the task of guarding intellectual property against a team of Linux pirates. After his court case ends in a disasterous loss, McQueen embarks on a death-defying car chase through the streets of San Francisco. With Robert Vaughn, Robert Duvall and Jacqueline Bisset; directed by Bill Gates. 114 min.

      * Stuffed penguins mysteriously disappearing from shelves in Utah stores .. later found in large pit in the middle of nowhere, apparently decapitated in ritualistic fashion .. is SCO responsible?

      * Tove Torvalds seen entering McBride residence and exiting next morning.. will this complicate the ongoing lawsuits?

      * Richard Stallman discovers that SCO Unix contains code from Emacs but terms of GPL are not met. After long drawn-out court battle, SCO agrees to settlement: must change "SCO" name to "GNU/SCO". Slashtrolls proclaim: "what's next Stallman, GNU/GNU/SCO?"

      * SCO lawyers are amazed to discover: GPL license text (when passed through a special XOR filter) contains SCO TRADE SECRETS! Lawsuits ensue! Hijinks a-plenty! Yowza!

      Yes it's looks like an ACTION-PACKED season is ahead!!!!

    2. Re:it was interesting at some point... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      * SCO views high-resolution pictures of Mars.. after careful study of the ice cap, a frustrated McBride proclaims "our intellectual property has been appropriate by Communist Mars forces!"

      Yes that one's SO GOOD! You'll see it TWICE!

    3. Re:it was interesting at some point... by westyvw · · Score: 1

      I said the same doamn thing in different words and I get modded down. Fucking Slashdot. Screw this I am going back to senseless posts, not bothering reading the article, google cut/pasting and in general just plain Karma hosting. I keep forgetting that I am writing to 5 year olds.

  18. Anyone fluent in .cz? root.cz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please translate the message at root.cz
    (it seems to suggest that the sco.txt file has been there since at least the 28th)

    1. Re:Anyone fluent in .cz? root.cz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats the frontpage http://root.cz
      it seems rather strange that the file sco.txt was put there on the 28th or before when in the txt it refers to the 29th?

    2. Re:Anyone fluent in .cz? root.cz by LinuxGeek · · Score: 1

      Subject: schvalne jestli ve SCO ctou ceske servery
      From: root
      Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 05:59:24 -0600
      To: redakce@root.cz

      That seems to be Friday morning, just before 6:00am by my reading.

      I also wonder if their mail server may still be vulnerable to this little problem

      --

      Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see. - Mark Twain
    3. Re:Anyone fluent in .cz? root.cz by a1bert · · Score: 1

      Subject: schvalne jestli ve SCO ctou ceske servery

      Subject: I'm wonder, if SCO reads czech servers

      the rest is translated here:
      http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=76635&t hreshol d=0&commentsort=0&tid=106&tid=185&tid=187&tid=88&m ode=thread&pid=6831760#6831859

  19. business vs tech presss by wwwrench · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The fact that SCO stock increased while there case was shown to suck, really shows we are not kicking SCO in the right place. We need to hit them where it hurts.

    We finally got to see what was presumably their best evidence, and it was a steaming turd of donkeyshit. They were either lying or were unbelievably negligent. While this was all over geek websites, it didn't make much of a ripple in the business press, and as the last article points out, SCO stock actually got pumped in the business press after the bogus code was released. And the business press is the place to hit SCO -- all they care about is their stock price, and the corporate hacks who determine stock prices don't read Slashdot.

    Playing on the defensive as the EFF is doing is good, but we also need to go on the offense more.

    People and organizations should contact biz journalists, or write letters to the editors. Send out press releases. Post the information at stock sites -- wherever. If stock traders know how bogus SCO's claims are, it will hurt the fuckwads at SCO. While the SCO story may not be of interest to the general public, it is of interest to the business community. I am sick of seeing unbalanced articles in businessweek or whatever, which contain no viewpoint from the free software software community.

    And hackers can go on the offensive by filing lawsuits or threatening such. Send out cease and desist letters and make it public with a press release. Specific people and development teams have been libeled. They have accused the kernel team of theft. Now that code snippets have been made public, further lies by SCO can even be considered as slander against the specific people who contributed that code. And those who are the public face of the kernel team can claim damages as well. While the damages one could claim would not be enough to retire on, it can damage SCO's stock price with the publicity. SCum needs to be told to put up or shut the fuck up.

    Stick it to the bastards!

    --

    Deconstruct the State
    1. Re:business vs tech presss by DASHSL0T · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Speaking of going on the offensive, I am trying to put together a list of alternatives for each company that is a member of Canopy Group. Hit them in the pocketbook, as that is all they understand.

      I need your help idientifying alternative companies for each of them. If you know alternatives to them, please contact me with the information, or reply to this thread. :)

      --
      Freedom Is Universal
      Linux-Universe
    2. Re:business vs tech presss by mlush · · Score: 1
      I am trying to put together a list of alternatives for each company that is a member of Canopy Group

      At the bottom of the list Linux Networx (which does) Linux Clustering

      The mystery company that payed up???

    3. Re:business vs tech presss by MuParadigm · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "Post the information at stock sites -- wherever. If stock traders know how bogus SCO's claims are, it will hurt the fuckwads at SCO."

      They know. Check out the SCOX messages at Yahoo. It's got a high noise to signal ratio, but a lot of people there are shooting down the stock pumpers, and spreading anti-FUD in general.

      The reason the stock has been going up is because a company known as Integral Capital Partners has apparently been purchasing a shitload of stock and filed with the SEC that they had over 5% interest in SCO as of 8/22. Interestingly enough, ICP owns the majority of shares in Drugstore.Com, and Melinda Gates (Bill's wife) sits on the board of Drugstore.com.

      I wouldn't be at all surprised if the real float on SCOX's stock was less than 25% at this point.

    4. Re:business vs tech presss by MuParadigm · · Score: 2, Informative

      For more information, check out Groklaw. Their latest article features a full write-up of Groklaw's research into the ICP affiliations, with links to the relevant documents and SEC filings.

    5. Re:business vs tech presss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I assume that excluding Trolltech from your list was a political decision?

    6. Re:business vs tech presss by Tsu+Dho+Nimh · · Score: 2, Informative
      " The fact that SCO stock increased while there case was shown to suck, really shows we are not kicking SCO in the right place. We need to hit them where it hurts. "

      The price of SCO's stock has NOTHING to do with the merits of their case. It's getting heavy attention from day traders, speculators, and what appears to be careful manipulation ... most of the rises happen on very light volume, and may be "painting the tape" (fake transactions at small volume done just to advance the price)

    7. Re:business vs tech presss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually it looks as though he just ran out of steam when he reached the 'L's running down SCO's list. Training Zone is listed out of alphabetical order on SCO's list for some reason.

    8. Re:business vs tech presss by DASHSL0T · · Score: 1

      That's correct. Trolltech will be on there when I get to T. :)

      --
      Freedom Is Universal
      Linux-Universe
    9. Re:business vs tech presss by Spunk · · Score: 1, Redundant

      ICP owns the majority of shares in Drugstore.Com

      I always knew there was some drug connection to ICP.

    10. Re:business vs tech presss by eniu!uine · · Score: 1

      Ok... this is a big deal. Exactly how much of Trolltech does Canopy own? I use KDE and it makes me sich to my stomach to think that Canopy controls the future of KDE.

    11. Re:business vs tech presss by platipusrc · · Score: 1

      They won't be there if you actually pay attention. There's no reason to attempt to blacklist TrollTech because you think they're owned by Canopy.

      --
      And the muscular cyborg German dudes dance with sexy French Canadians
    12. Re:business vs tech presss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They won't be there if you actually pay attention. There's no reason to attempt to blacklist TrollTech because you think they're owned by Canopy.

      Why would that mean they don't belong on the list? The list is of companies in which Canopy holds a share of ownership. Are you able to state even that Trolltech is the company in which that share is lowest?

      By all means dispute whether the list is relevant or a fair basis for action at all, if that's what you believe, but singling out Trolltech as something different from the others is simply dishonest.

    13. Re:business vs tech presss by cptgrudge · · Score: 1

      Thank you. I am actually in a position to make decisions about products and services where I work. Your list has helped with several.

      --
      Qualitas edurus commercium, nullus penitus net rimor, nullus deus beneficium
    14. Re:business vs tech presss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Alternatives for DR-DOS (it is not Doctor-DOS; DR here once stood for Digital Research, the company who originally wrote that MS-DOS clone) are FreeDOS, Red Hat's eCos, or uCLinux to name just three. There are many others.

    15. Re:business vs tech presss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to their website Trolltech are involved in more than just their widget set. They're selling themselves as heavily involved in the embedded Linux market which is growing and potentially very lucrative. Pushing people towards alternatives there will probably have more impact than worrying about QT, and will probably sit easier with some factions in the Slashdot crowd.

    16. Re:business vs tech presss by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 1

      The reason the stock has been going up is because a company known as Integral Capital Partners has apparently been purchasing a shitload of stock and filed with the SEC that they had over 5% interest in SCO as of 8/22. Interestingly enough, ICP owns the majority of shares in Drugstore.Com, and Melinda Gates (Bill's wife) sits on the board of Drugstore.com.

      Nice research. So, assuming that Integral Capital Partners is actually a proxy for BillG himself, it's just another way of pumping the stock to finance SCO and its officers. How blatant. I'm still wondering how Darl McBride is getting his payoff, since he himself isn't dumping stock like the others.

      --
      Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
    17. Re:business vs tech presss by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 1

      The reason the stock has been going up is because a company known as Integral Capital Partners has apparently been purchasing a shitload of stock and filed with the SEC that they had over 5% interest in SCO as of 8/22. Interestingly enough, ICP owns the majority of shares in Drugstore.Com, and Melinda Gates (Bill's wife) sits on the board of Drugstore.com.

      Sorry for replying twice, but this is important. Are you able to substantiate your comments on who's buying the SCO stock? I see that Integral Capital Partners is based in Seattle, what a coincidence.

      --
      Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
    18. Re:business vs tech presss by MuParadigm · · Score: 3, Informative


      I can't take credit for the research on this one. It's reported on Groklaw, and the research was a joint effort of a couple of people, but mostly Pam Jones (I think that's her last name, it might be "Johnson").

      Anyway, the story is heavily linked to the reference documents and Sec filings, so if you are interested you can easily verify the story for yourself there. Pam, aka pj, runs Groklaw and is a paralegel. She started the site to provide information on news stories from a legal research perspective.

      When she started the site, the SCO v. IBM story was just breaking, and it became the site's focus. It's since developed a community of tech. and legal commentators who add to the research. If you're interested in in-depth discussions of the details of this case, Groklaw's probably the best resource for it on the web right now.

    19. Re:business vs tech presss by scrytch · · Score: 1

      Oddly enough, your list leaves out SCO. I'm not talking about just OS choice here, but the applications it's used for, or some niche of professional services. There's reasons some people run SCO after all, even if it's lock-in.

      Then again, their grand total of two new licensees last year suggests that maybe everyone's already found alternatives.

      Also, it would be informative to know how much holding that Canopy has in any of these companies. Don't they own some small percentage of Redhat after all?

      --
      I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
    20. Re:business vs tech presss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's easy to stick it to them...

      Just SHORT the muthafucka!!!

    21. Re:business vs tech presss by WNight · · Score: 1

      One good thing about SCO's stock price going up is that it's oportunistic bastards buying it. They've read about SCOs claims, and likely about all the rest of the analysis, and they've decided they're in for some of that easy money.

      So the SCO execs unload their stock to a bunch of just as greedy, but much dumber people who don't understand why rats suddenly flee a ship. Think of it as evolution in action. Once the greedy hordes have lost all their money and learned a lesson, we've got a relatively small handful of SCO execs to hound till the ends of the earth, Ralsky style.

      Maybe when we're done we can go after the Rambus execs...

    22. Re:business vs tech presss by WNight · · Score: 1

      Be careful to only include companies where SCO's parent owns more than a percent or two of stock... Make sure they have enough to matter.

      Otherwise, all they'd need to do to really fuck with our heads would be purchase 1% of Redhat, or VA Linux. Cheap stocks that are publicly traded so nobody could stop them, as much as we dislike them.

    23. Re:business vs tech presss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't short what brokers aren't willing to loan you.

  20. Weekly ? by FrankoBoy · · Score: 2, Funny

    Sorry to point this out, but it's spelled D-A-I-L-Y ;)

  21. Re: hopefully ? by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    "I guess your own dogfood doesn't apply for /. editors ?"

    You're just begging for another dupe-fest on 04-01-04.

  22. Frozen core... by superchkn · · Score: 5, Funny

    Yeah, I'll believe that "sco.txt" link when SCO releases every last one of those allegedly misappropriated snippets of code to the LKML.

    Well, I take that back. I wouldn't be surprised if SCO released that themselves in the hopes that they could catch a OpenSource supporter breaking into their server...

    You know you have to watch out for them sneaky commie bastards!

  23. Mormon by ultrabot · · Score: 0

    Interestingly, the economist article says that Darl is a devour mormon. Don't they have a bible that some guy allegedly dictated from behind a wall? Doesn't it infringe the trade "secrets" of the normal bible in some ways?

    --
    Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
    1. Re:Mormon by Phroggy · · Score: 4, Funny

      Interestingly, the economist article says that Darl is a devour mormon. Don't they have a bible that some guy allegedly dictated from behind a wall? Doesn't it infringe the trade "secrets" of the normal bible in some ways?

      What "secrets" are you talking about?

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    2. Re:Mormon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well it wouldn't be much of a secret if I posted it on /. now would it?

    3. Re:Mormon by ultrabot · · Score: 1

      What "secrets" are you talking about?

      I will be disclosing portions of the secrets if you are willing to sign an NDA, and realize that the book of Mormon can't be cleaned up without crippling its salvation-inducing capabilities.

      --
      Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
    4. Re:Mormon by Fat+Casper · · Score: 1
      Doesn't it infringe the trade "secrets" of the normal bible in some ways?

      There's only one "religion" (and yes, I use that term loosely) that I can think of that uses trade secrets. Remember them?

      --
      I spent a year in Iraq looking for WMD and all I found was this lousy sig.
    5. Re:Mormon by mattite · · Score: 1

      I think you are refering to the Book of Mormon. It wasn't dictated; it was translated by Joseph Smith Jr., and not behind a wall. If you really want some facts about it you can read it or you can visit this site.

      As for Mr. McBride, well, there are many definitions of 'devout.' I know of people that go to church once a year for Easter Sunday and call themselves devout. I think we can get a sense in some ways through his behavior as to how devout Darl McBride is.

    6. Re:Mormon by lamber45 · · Score: 1
      ...a bible that some guy allegedly dictated from behind a wall?

      On the contrary, the story about Samuel the Lamanite is that he preached from the top of a wall while while the irreligious capitalists threw stones at him (Helaman 16:2).

      There are open-source people and closed-source people in the church, just like there are Republicans, Democrats, and Libertarians, or like the bishop might be an engineer, a lawyer or a carpenter. "Devout" is ambigous, too. Mr. McBride might go to church every Sunday and want to stay in Utah so he can be with his friends and family, but even so he might (not) "get it" the way he (doesn't) "get" the open-source principle. Can a recovering alchoholic be a "devout" Christian, even if he goes out and gets smashed the next day? I've met men who claim to be such; for my own part, I don't claim to be "devout" anything.

      A search of the Ensign (the church's primary magazine) over the past 30 years turns no references to Mr. McBride, which means that he never contributed an article and probably has never held responsibility in any church unit higher than a stake (on the order of 2.5e3 people make up a stake), nor been stake president. Mr. McBride doesn't speak for me any more than I speak for him, and I won't call him "Brother" until I have personal interaction with him.

    7. Re:Mormon by Turf · · Score: 1

      Even more interesting, if you read the book of mormon you learn that their religion was started by thieves. One of the claimed historical figures in the book stole records from the Temple in Jerusalem before setting sail for the North Aremican continent.

    8. Re:Mormon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Records that were about to be destroyed. When one is commanded by God to do something, his commandment is the law. How can it be theft if there is no law broken?

      According to your statement the Bible must be false also, God has given commandments similar commandments here too.

    9. Re:Mormon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interestingly, the economist article says that Darl is a devour mormon.

      Holly crap... This guy is a bigger monster than we thought. :)

    10. Re:Mormon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey now you are getting it. Yes, it is a sad truth, but the Bible is just a book of fictional stories. Now the healing can begin and you may rejoin rational society.

    11. Re:Mormon by Spunk · · Score: 1

      Darl is a devour mormon.

      Hey hey hey. Don't go spreading FUD about my homies in da LDS. They may be weird, but they're not cannibals!

    12. Re:Mormon by amcguinn · · Score: 1

      I was wondering if anyone would bring this up. The "wall" business doesn't ring any bells with me, but SCO's idea of what constitutes "evidence" looks a bit less odd when set against "the testimony of the eight witnesses" and so on.

      Probably it's stretching a point a bit, though not as much as the Economist does comparing the case to the SCOpes trial.

    13. Re:Mormon by Malcontent · · Score: 1

      Wow there are democrats in the LDS? Who would have thought!

      --

      War is necrophilia.

    14. Re:Mormon by cyberformer · · Score: 1

      He claims to be a devout Mormon, just like he claims to own the IP on all operating systems ever written (except Solaris). I don't know anything about Mormon beliefs, but my guess is that few religions would condone his conduct, and I see no reason to believe anything he says. Fake piety is becoming almost as popular in business as in politics.

      Anyway, the point of the article is that SCO are a bunch of crazy fundamentalists who can be be compared to creationists, so pointing out his religious beliefs is fitting (if slightly insulting to Mormons and creationists). The analogy isn't perfect, though: SCO are claiming that Linux evolved from "their" Unix, while sane people are pretty sure that it was created anew.

    15. Re:Mormon by vsprintf · · Score: 1

      What "secrets" are you talking about?

      He is, of course, talking about the Book of Genesis, which describes the advent of the holy System V UNIX and the holy UNIX Development Methods that were used in some detail. It then relates how dominion of the UNIX was given to the Prophet McBride and the tribe of SCO. It is all restricted IP, so I'm not surprised that you haven't read it. :)

    16. Re:Mormon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      He claims to be a devout Mormon...

      I just thought it was a typo (extra 'm' in there...)

      Or maybe Darl's magic underwear is a bit too snug.

    17. Re:Mormon by Turf · · Score: 1

      Oh? When in the Bible did God command one of his worshippers to delibrartely break one of his own commandments? If these records were about to be destroyed, then how did Ezra (writter of Chronicles) compile the exhaust geneology found in the first 12 chapters of Chronicles? Especially when Ezra lived many years *after* the supposed destruction of the records?

  24. SCO.TXT w/ English trans by Knunov · · Score: 4, Informative

    In case the SCO.TXT file gets /.'d, here is a copy of it, along with a rough Czech -> English translation. I will post an exact translation when my Czech buddies wake up :)

    ----------
    Subject: schvalne jestli ve SCO ctou ceske servery
    From: root <root@mail.sco.com>
    Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 05:59:24 -0600
    To: redakce@root.cz

    jestli ano,

    urcite se budou lepe venovat svym serverum.. a nejen tomu nasledujicimu :-)

    <b>if yes,

    it will be better to get the whole server.. trace/follow the server :-)</b>

    mail:/usr/share # hostname -f; uname -a
    mail.sco.com
    Linux mail 2.4.19-64GB-SMP #1 SMP Fri Feb 7 16:29:22 UTC 2003 i686 unknown
    mail:/usr/share # free
    total used free shared buffers cached
    Mem: 2068160 1997756 70404 0 210712 1527008
    -/+ buffers/cache: 260036 1808124
    Swap: 2097136 0 2097136

    mail:/usr/share # df -h
    Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
    /dev/sda2 2.0G 410M 1.5G 22% /
    /dev/sda1 99M 10M 84M 11% /boot
    /dev/sda8 3.3G 33M 3.1G 2% /home
    /dev/sda6 1012M 35M 926M 4% /tmp
    /dev/sda5 3.0G 1.6G 1.3G 55% /usr
    /dev/sda7 325G 905M 308G 1% /var
    shmfs 1010M 0 1010M 0% /dev/shm

    root:6X7liA1zmJhyA:12255:0:10000::::

    ----------

    Knunov

    --
    Why do users with IDs under 100,000 or over 700,000 usually have the most worthwhile comments?
    1. Re:SCO.TXT w/ English trans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The translation above is bogus, it goes like this:

      czech: urcite se budou lepe venovat svym serverum.. a nejen tomu nasledujicimu :-)
      english: they'll sure take better care of their servers.. and not only the next one :-)

    2. Re:SCO.TXT w/ English trans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2G RAM with only 2G swap? No wonder it's going down all the time!

    3. Re:SCO.TXT w/ English trans by chad_r · · Score: 5, Funny

      Do you know what "6X7liA1zmJhyA" means? I have a Czech dictionary, but I douldn't find that word in there.

    4. Re:SCO.TXT w/ English trans by Mad+Bad+Rabbit · · Score: 1
      Do you know what "6X7liA1zmJhyA" means? I have a Czech dictionary, but I douldn't find that word in there.

      "I will not buy this tobacconist, it is scratched."

      --
      >;k
    5. Re:SCO.TXT w/ English trans by ethan_clark · · Score: 1

      I imagine it's the hashed version of the root password. in theory, one could write a script to brute-force the root password to sco's mail box using that hashed password...

    6. Re:SCO.TXT w/ English trans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm, isn't it kinda supposed to be embarrassing that this is a hacked Linux system, even if it is SCO running it?

    7. Re:SCO.TXT w/ English trans by Kevin+DeGraaf · · Score: 1

      Do you know what "6X7liA1zmJhyA" means?

      I realize you were joking, but...

      That's an old-school DES crypted password. If this text file is legit (doubtful), that would mean SCO is stupidly using old tech instead of modern MD5 passwords. Fools.

      --
      We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked.
    8. Re:SCO.TXT w/ English trans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      That's Hungarian, you wally.

    9. Re:SCO.TXT w/ English trans by shaitand · · Score: 1

      In theory? This is done on a daily basis...

    10. Re:SCO.TXT w/ English trans by shaitand · · Score: 1

      Not when their using 5yr old security on it it's not. Linux has erm progressed in the security department a tad from what this file indicates their using.

    11. Re:SCO.TXT w/ English trans by jiri+B · · Score: 1

      In case the SCO.TXT file gets /.'d, here is a copy of it, along with a rough Czech -> English translation. I will post an exact translation when my Czech buddies wake up :)

      ----------
      Subject: schvalne jestli ve SCO ctou ceske servery
      From: root
      Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 05:59:24 -0600
      To: redakce@root.cz

      jestli ano,

      urcite se budou lepe venovat svym serverum.. a nejen tomu nasledujicimu :-)

      if yes,

      it will be better to get the whole server.. trace/follow the server :-)


      Hmm, not the most accurate of translations... let's see if I can do better:

      Subject: on purpose, to see if SCO reads Czech servers

      if yes,

      they'll certainly pay more attention to their own servers... and not just the following one :-)


      Why yes, I am a native speaker.
      --
      -- Hi! I'm the "Good Times" signature virus. Copy me into your Sig!
  25. graphs! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Geez, if you're going to spend lots of time doing some silly report (the speculation on SCO's stock) - add nice purty graphs (like that fella who projected the release of the linux kernel)!

  26. For what it's worth... by skogs · · Score: 4, Funny
    I know the horse has been whipped until it won't go anymore...

    But I did think that the articles were pretty well written. They were not polarized and edgy(as I would have written it...something along the lines of 'those lying cheating @#$% call my @#$# code @#$@theirs??'.

    I also, just for kicks, tried to telnet into the mail.sco.com server. No luck. They don't accept telnet links. That would have been fun ehh?

    At first I didn't think they were up, still DDoS...but I was able to ping them. Ping Ping Ping. I only did it once, but I'll bet you guys could ping them too...just to make sure they were still up of course. Purely curiosity.

    --
    Who is this that even the wind and the waves obey Him? Surely this computer must submit also!
    1. Re:For what it's worth... by neillewis · · Score: 1

      A tried to find out about the SCOsource licensing scheme, after 4 days their qmail bounced the email they created from the enquiry form on their website back to me via MAILER-DAEMON@mail.ut.caldera.com saying it couldn't deliver to webmaster@caldera.com.

      Obviously they're too busy to want my business...

    2. Re:For what it's worth... by UnassumingLocalGuy · · Score: 1

      Can't ping them anymore...

      (10:07:59 ) chris on XO $ ping mail.sco.com
      PING mail.sco.com (216.250.130.37): 56 data bytes
      ^C
      --- mail.sco.com ping statistics ---
      32 packets transmitted, 0 packets received, 100% packet loss

      --
      "Hu, ho, ho-ah-oh-oh-oh. Hu, ho ho-ah-oh-oh-oh. Mario Paint! Whoaaa!"
    3. Re:For what it's worth... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looks like they are back up.

      Pinging mail.sco.com [216.250.130.37] with 32 bytes of data

      Reply from 216.250.130.37: bytes=32 time=71ms TTL=49
      Reply from 216.250.130.37: bytes=32 time=71ms TTL=49
      Reply from 216.250.130.37: bytes=32 time=73ms TTL=49
      Reply from 216.250.130.37: bytes=32 time=71ms TTL=49

      Ping statistics for 216.250.130.37:
      Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
      Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
      Minimum = 71ms, Maximum = 73ms, Average = 71ms

    4. Re:For what it's worth... by corkhead0 · · Score: 0
      ping www.sco.com Pinging www.sco.com [216.250.140.112] with 32 bytes of data: Request timed out. Request timed out. Request timed out. Request timed out. Ping statistics for 216.250.140.112: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 0, Lost = 4 (100% loss),
      Still under a DDoS :P
    5. Re:For what it's worth... by shaitand · · Score: 1

      hmm I just do it the old fashioned way, I typed www.sco.com into my browser and noted how nothing came up ;)

    6. Re:For what it's worth... by corkhead0 · · Score: 0

      But it's much easier to make a 5 meg batch file filled with "ping www.sco.com" and run 13 copies all at once :D

    7. Re:For what it's worth... by shaitand · · Score: 1

      hmm good point

    8. Re:For what it's worth... by shaitand · · Score: 1

      although if your using a "batch" file, and calling it that I'd assume your using windows. If that's the case, a one liner like:

      ping www.sco.com -t

      is better since it will continue forever and saves the trouble of typing it over and over again.

      if your using linux then just:

      ping www.sco.com will do the trick, since it pings until you stop it by default.

      your right though, I can see how everyone doing this is critical so we can be sure to know the very moment sco's servers respond.

  27. Re:Warm up that password cracker? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    root:6X7liA1zmJhyA:12255:0:10000::::

    non-shadow passwords, does any linux distribution still do this? unsalted crypt encryption? if i understand this file correctly, root is userid 12255, group 0? has no home dir, and no login shell? not a very useful account, even if you do crack the password.

    more likely this is some sort of distributed authentication system based file, and the hash is just some component of that. the password will be useless if you get it.

  28. ok, time for bed by loraksus · · Score: 2, Funny

    I read that as "it is time to clean the taint of sco"
    yup. bedtime. I swear I haven't been watching porno.

    --
    1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
  29. Re:Warm up that password cracker? by DA-MAN · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You're definately not reading it right. This is what shadow files look like. This is a shadow'd password.

    --
    Can I get an eye poke?
    Dog House Forum
  30. nmap scan by Compunerd · · Score: 1

    nmap tells me...
    # nmap -O mail.sco.com ...
    Remote operating system guess: Linux Kernel 2.4.0 - 2.4.18 (X86) ...
    why linux - what's SCO unix, then?

    --
    Computers are like air conditioners.
    - They stop working when you open Windows.
    1. Re:nmap scan by superchkn · · Score: 1

      Come on, we all know "enterprise" doesn't mean web-servers! The real money is in the cash register market. What kind of business doesn't need a cash register?

      Besides, it takes the ability to adapt and evolve to make it in the webserver business. Isn't it better to leverage the state-of-the-art 30 year old code base one spent $5 million on rather than waste time creating new code?

    2. Re:nmap scan by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

      Narf! Last time I checked, their web server was changed to report that it was running Apache on UNIX instead of Linux as previously. Any bets that they just changed the string that Apache returns rather than actually shifting over to their own OS?

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    3. Re:nmap scan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FWIW, I notice that he is "mail",

      Here's the smtp:
      possum@gandalf:~$ telnet mail.sco.com 25
      Trying 216.250.130.37...
      Connected to mail.sco.com.
      Escape character is '^]'.
      220 mail.sco.com ESMTP Postfix

      Hmmm, according to CERT(R) Advisory CA-2003-07 Remote Buffer Overflow in Sendmail, if they had not patched this, it would be trivial for any script kiddie to exploit.

      Now, I don't have access to the logs, but from what I can ascertain from the outside, this is most likely an good hack....

    4. Re:nmap scan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are using Postfix, not Sendmail. Might still be vulnerable given that this is SCO.

  31. Dude by FrankoBoy · · Score: 1
    For that matter, did the Czech poster mean to imply that they were able to log in directly as root from a remote site?
    Subject: schvalne jestli ve SCO ctou ceske servery
    From: root <root@mail.sco.com>
    Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 05:59:24 -0600
    To: redakce@root.cz


    They obviously did imply it, just check the From: header ( dunno if the log's real though ). What else could it be, a mole at SCO ? Hell, I wish ;)
  32. Whew! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just when I thought I'd suffer from withdrawl, another SCO article appears just in time to save my sanity.

  33. RTFM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    $ man 5 shadow

  34. First SCOst by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Would you like a McBride with that?

    1. Re:First SCOst by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Man, this is fuckin' hilarious!!! Aaaahhhhhaahahahaahahahh

  35. Free Lunch! by phauxfinnish · · Score: 5, Insightful
    At a more general level ... he found the entire free-software trend "communistic", he says: "We don't get the whole free-lunch thing."
    It's not about "free-lunch" and he knows it! This more appropriately equates to "We don't get the whole free-speech thing." This happens to fit with a quote in this story:
    Darl McBride, current CEO, says the last straw for SCO was at Linux World this year. "An IBM executive stood up and basically announced, 'We're moving our AIX (Unix) expertise into Linux, and we're going to destroy the value of Unix,' " says McBride, who contends that the statement alone was a violation of IBM's AIX contract. (emphasis added)
    He wants a closed system, where any advancements made are the sole property of a central organization who can there-by control the market, and we're the communists? Alright, maybe in a classical sense of communism, the Open Source movement does share some traits. However, in the derogatory fashion he implies, SCOs recent actions much closer resemble the totalitarian regimes of applied communism.
    1. Re:Free Lunch! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jepp, don't you know that Leninism/Stalinism was the strongest enemy of communism and killed more Commies than all other anti-communistic movements together?

    2. Re:Free Lunch! by phauxfinnish · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I never said communism is the cause of totalitarianism; it's just that they are equated because most (all?) communist experiments eventually fall to it.

    3. Re:Free Lunch! by neillewis · · Score: 3, Insightful

      OSS is only communistic in the same way that barn raising was communistic, or Adam Smith was a comunist for wanting a free market.

      Calling linux communistic is like Sara Lee calling the local church ladies communist for holding a bake sale.

    4. Re:Free Lunch! by MuParadigm · · Score: 1


      "It's not about 'free-lunch' and he knows it! This more appropriately equates to 'We don't get the whole free-speech thing.'"

      You know, I don't think he does know it. He really does come across as being that stupid. I don't think he gets the free speech thing either.

    5. Re:Free Lunch! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Soviet Union was never communist; it was socialist.

    6. Re:Free Lunch! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jepp, "real exixting communism" lacked democracy, and democracy dosn't leed to good governments, but helps to easy and legaly get rid of bad governments. Btw, that's what bothers me about a president saying "Everything would be easyer in an dictatorship"

    7. Re:Free Lunch! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Have eventually fallen" instead of "eventually fall" I think you mean, unless you have some perfect model of human and societal behaviour that allows you to make statements like that.

    8. Re:Free Lunch! by mysticgoat · · Score: 1

      Open system vs closed system, central organization vs decentralized development community, communistic vs capitalistic... None of those matter to Darl McBride.

      His actions demonstrate he follows WMIM/WYIN* of wealth management, and in that system all the other terminology is verbiage to be used or not as needed.

      • *key to acronyms
        WMIM: "what's mine is mine"
        WYIN: "what's yours is negotiable"
    9. Re:Free Lunch! by uncadonna · · Score: 1
      Calling linux communistic is like Sara Lee calling the local church ladies communist for holding a bake sale.

      Bravo! Exactly! .

      I'm considering adapting this as a .sig; "Proprietary software corporations calling open source 'communism' is like fast food chains calling neighborhood potlucks subversive and lobbying to make them illegal". Do you want credit for inspiring this?

      Voluntary sharing is not evil! There is a real question about how much compelled sharing (taxation) is evil, but once the line moves to the point where I'm not ALLOWED to give anything away, clearly a new form of tyrrany is emerging.

      --
      mt
    10. Re:Free Lunch! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Btw, that's what bothers me about a president saying "Everything would be easyer in an dictatorship"

      He's right, and he was joking. It was obvious that he was joking. I don't believe you made me defend G.W. Bush... I never thought I would.

      Bah.

    11. Re:Free Lunch! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, same goes for Microsoft when the spilled the commy FUD.

      I consider myself a libertarian, I would never once entertain the idea that I should work for free, and that someone should force me to work for some else's benefit.

      However Free software fits perfectly into my thinking because 1) it requires minimal government overhead (a: the "contract" of the GPL, etc, rarely need the court system to function, b: take away or weaken copyright law and the system still function much like it does now)

      And 2) I can choose if want to give away my work or not. I feel that when I write or modify open source software, I solve my own problem, and thus have already reaped the benefit. Then, *if I want to* I can distribute the changes at zero cost. Even if I'm completely selfish, I can ignore the GPL and not distribute the software and be compliant with copyright law AND the spirit of the GPL. This is what I do at work, for instance.

      I feel the *extra* benefit of charging for copies violates free market principles that create competition.

      There's nothing "communist" about voluntary cooperation and competitively-priced products. Sure, RMS is a lefty, but I just ignore his lefty rants and focus on the Free software rants, which are spot-on, and, I believe, fully compatible with any political thinking.

    12. Re:Free Lunch! by phauxfinnish · · Score: 1

      You would be correct with "have eventually fallen". Although, the best model of human and societal behaviour, reality, has shown that people are just too easy to corrupt. True, the past is not enough of an indicator of future success, but it is a model. Then again, all civilizations, no matter what systems they use, fall and cycle through stages of totalitarianism.

    13. Re:Free Lunch! by BigBadBri · · Score: 1
      My preferred point of reference is Thoreau - he fits the Open Source philosophy like a glove, and could never be considered a communist, even by the most degenerate corporate parasite.

      See Life without principle for what I believe to be his best example of truly free thinking.

      --
      oh brave new world, that has such people in it!
    14. Re:Free Lunch! by neillewis · · Score: 1

      It may be a bit long for a sig but I think it's a good point to remember so knock yourself out. It'd be nice to think of a t-shirt suitable short form:

      linux: communist as mom's apple pie

    15. Re:Free Lunch! by neillewis · · Score: 1

      I've never read any Thoreau before today, but he's right - we should understand the wider consequences of our actions and work towards something higher than a quick buck - is highly relevant.

      The intellectual closure continues and are in a battle to carve out a space for free expression.

    16. Re:Free Lunch! by shaitand · · Score: 1

      Open source is ideal communism in practice. Real communism (something I've never seen practiced on a large scale outside of the open source world) is not a bad thing at all, it's a very good thing.

      Just because communism was turned into a dirty world in the US because of all the FUD and propoganda spread during the cold war doesn't mean a group of people with an average IQ well above the average idiot should consider it a dirty word here.

    17. Re:Free Lunch! by shaitand · · Score: 1

      There is nothing about communism itself that requires cooperation not be voluntary.

      The sum of communism is this, if you have a number of people who work together resulting in a direct benefit of the group rather than the individual (or as well as the individual), you have communism.

      That isn't bad at all, it's a tool, a method of progression that open source shows can work in practice. The implementations that have existed and were combined with dictatorship and made more strongly evil by the propoganda spread in the cold war were actually closer to a monarchy (a dictator is a king, regardless of title) with a socialist economy.

    18. Re:Free Lunch! by qtp · · Score: 1

      The sum of communism is this, if you have a number of people who work together resulting in a direct benefit of the group rather than the individual (or as well as the individual), you have communism.

      There are many systems that would fit your description of "communism". The diehard Marxist would statethat you are wrong and that Communism requires the outlawing of privately owned property (ie: "property is theft"). Fundamentalist Capitolists (Neoconsrvatives) defines Communism much in the same way as you and equate any altruistic (non-selfish) beliefs, tendancies, or actions with Stalinism (Centralised ownership of all property and centralised management of all transactions by an authoritarian government) while ignoring the likelyhood that the laissez faire aproach to Capitolism that they support will eventually lead to a similar situation in regards to individual rights and freedom to conduct one's life in both personal and business matters according one's own beliefs.

      Hence, my sig:

      --
      Read, L
  36. Re: hopefully ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why, if it bothers you so much, do you come here JUST TO COMPLAIN.

    Jesus.

  37. Thank God by RevSmiley · · Score: 4, Funny

    I thought I was going to have to go Cold turkey. I was starting to get delerious from SCO story withdrawals.

    Yes I can't spell and often leave out whole words let alone the endings of words. Some place I lost 20 IQ points. I am only a slightly above average 120 now. maybe I should have some more to drink.

    --
    As you can see I don't care about my karma.
  38. Weird shit by FrankoBoy · · Score: 2, Funny

    Unfortunately, the Slashdot editors always seem to forget to verify that there's a link to the SCO website somewhere in the stories. Does anobody knows what their URL is ? I'm Google-impaired and it would help me a lot to go and buy a Linux license for my Debian box. Thank you guys.

    *wakes up* AAAAAAAAAAH ! What the hell was THAT ?!

    1. Re:Weird shit by mlush · · Score: 1
      it would help me a lot to go and buy a Linux license for my Debian box. Thank you guys. *wakes up*

      I'd change your coffee and while your at it, remember you don't have to use it in kilo amonuts

  39. Suing SCO in small claims court? by damas · · Score: 1

    Suppose:

    1. I am a small time kernel contributor. I have about 10-20 lines of code in the linux kernel.

    2. SCO distributes the linux kernel in binary form only.

    3. My copyrighted work is available to SCO for distribution only under the GPL (which is a licence - a contract).

    4. SCO breaches the GPL as follows:
    4.a. Section 3 - SCO does not make the source code to the program available.
    4.b. Section 4 blah blah - SCO is licensing Linux.
    4.c. Section 6 somewhat disputable - accompany with SCO press releases - especially when they threaten to sue GNU/Linux users - again licensing.
    4.d. Section 7 - SCO continues to distribute although it seeks to apply additional retrictions through yet unfounded copyright claims - the key term of secton 7 is "believe" - SCO "believes" additional restrictions apply.

    Claims:

    I want 20$/loc + court expenses. Nothing else.

    Questions to lawyers out there ...

    1. Can this be done through small claims court because it's a contract breach?
    2. If I'm outside US can a lawyer do this?

    1. Re:Suing SCO in small claims court? by zippity8 · · Score: 0, Troll

      SCO is suing on the presumption that the GPL is invalid and does not apply. Assuming that this holds, what would you be suing them for?

      I'd be more worried about getting trampled by big-time lawyers, and then being used as an ugly precedent where the GPL was shown to be inapplicable to IP rights in the Linux kernel.

    2. Re:Suing SCO in small claims court? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. What contract? Do you have a paper with the signature of a SCO executive on it? If you don't have such a paper, you have no contract with SCO, so you can't sue them for breach of contract.

      2. If you want to sue for copyright infringement, you have to do it in federal court, not a small claims court.

      3. If you want to sue for copyright infringement, it helps a lot to register your copyright first. Start with that.

    3. Re:Suing SCO in small claims court? by damas · · Score: 1

      Why small claims court :

      This dispute is for a lot less than 5000$. There's no copyright dispute. SCO doesn't claim ownership of my code. I don't claim ownership of any of theirs.

    4. Re:Suing SCO in small claims court? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sigh, it sounds like you really don't understand law.
      There are four ways SCO might be hurting you: violation of contract, infringement of copyright, infringement of patent, abuse of trademark.
      Do you have a contract with SCO? That is, do you have a piece of paper with the signature of a SCO executive? If you have no contract, you can't sue for contract violation.
      Do you have a copyright? Yes, you do, because you wrote the code. However -- you cannot sue someone for copyright infringement in small claims court. You have to do it in federal court.
      Do you have a patent (!) or trademark? If so, then you should talk to a real lawyer.

      From the facts you've stated so far, you have a copyright case. You own a copyright, and you think that SCO is distributing copies of your work against the terms of your license (the GPL). That's the essence of copyright infringement. A Small Claims court will not hear a copyright infringement case.

      Your notion that a "copyright case" means that "SCO is claiming to own the copyright on your code" is just flat wrong. A copyright case also includes infringement, where someone distributes copies of your code without your consent, even though they acknowledge that you own the copyright.

    5. Re:Suing SCO in small claims court? by damas · · Score: 1

      I believe I have both a copyright case and a violation of agreement case. The SCO case (filed with the State Court of Utah) shows that you can sue outside of federal court even if you allege more than contract violations. In particular, in their claim SCO alleges that part of their IP was contributed into Linux. And as my claim is for less than 5000$ (limit for SCC claims in CA) I should be able to go to SCC.

    6. Re:Suing SCO in small claims court? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have a look at http://www.sco.com/ibmlawsuit. Look at the exhibits, starting with Exhibit A. The Exhibits include contracts between IBM and SCO. SCO is suing IBM because SCO claims IBM broke those contracts. You will also see, if you READ the lawsuit, that there is NOTHING BUT contract violations in the claims. There are NO copyright infringement claims in the lawsuit.

      Do you have any contracts with SCO? No contract means no lawsuit for contract violation. It's that simple.

    7. Re:Suing SCO in small claims court? by damas · · Score: 1

      Agreement violations - there's no need for contracts in Small Claims Court. I don't make any copyright infringement claims either.

    8. Re:Suing SCO in small claims court? by Tsu+Dho+Nimh · · Score: 1
      1. Can this be done through small claims court because it's a contract breach?
      No ... it becomes copyright violation, which is fereral, and "small claims" courts don't do breach of contract

      2. If I'm outside US can a lawyer do this?
      Yes, but it's expensive.

    9. Re:Suing SCO in small claims court? by idiotnot · · Score: 1

      In most states, you can't sue a foreign (meaning out-of-state) corporation in small-claims court. So, unless you're a kernel developer, and a resident of Delaware....

    10. Re:Suing SCO in small claims court? by LMCBoy · · Score: 1

      Assuming that [the GPL is struck down], what would you be suing them for?

      Because if the GPL is found to be invalid (good luck), then all GPL'd code reverts to standard copyright law, under which no one, SCO included, has the right to distribute any of the code that they didn't write.

      Don't forget: GPL != public domain.

      --
      Liberal (adj.): Free from bigotry; open to progress; tolerant of others.
    11. Re:Suing SCO in small claims court? by screenrc · · Score: 1
      In worst case, only a few sections of the GPL
      might be found invalide. The rest of the GPL will
      remain valid.

      According to the GPL:


      "If any portion of this section is held invalid or unenforceable under
      any particular circumstance, the balance of the section is intended to
      apply and the section as a whole is intended to apply in other
      circumstances."

    12. Re:Suing SCO in small claims court? by shaitand · · Score: 1

      AFAIK IANAL

      A license agreement is a contract, copyright law is what prevents someone from distributing your copyrighted work without one, the license itself is a contract giving them permission to do so in x ways, under x conditions.

      The license which allows them distribute, if they violate the license it's a breach of contract, with the contract invalided it's also copyright infringment. If there was no license to begin with it'd simply be copyright infringment.

      In short, distribute with no license and you have:

      copyright infringment

      have a license but violate it and continue distributing and you have:

      breach of contract AND
      copyright infringment

      They agreed to the terms of the contract when they distributed the code under it terms to begin with, by not distributing the source code to those they distributed it to, they have violated that contract.

      copyright infringment is a violation of federal law and would need to be pursued in federal court... but I'm pretty sure the breach of contract could be persued in small claims court. Just because you pursue one doesn't mean you have to persue the other...

    13. Re:Suing SCO in small claims court? by shaitand · · Score: 1

      yes but the gpl is a license, by accepting it's terms they've entered into a contract under which they were allowed to distribute your code (something they wouldn't be allowed to do under copyright law).

      The contract is the license, the copyright is the reason they need it. Breaking the license and continuing to distribute is like not having one and therefore copyright violation. But breaking the license in itself is a breach of contract which THEY DO have with the copyright holders. There are plenty of ways to enter into a contract, a signiture is just one of them.

  40. Re:sco.txt fake ? by terminal.dk · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Lokking at the password line, you will notice that the password is stored as a standard crypt password.

    I can't remember how many years ago it became standard to use MD5 sums instead, which are way harder to crack. The only reason to use crypt passwords today is because you had to carry hundreds of users forward, and was not willing to re-issue a new password.

    I have now put john the ripper at the job to crack the password, so I can see if the password looks likely to be true.

  41. very bad translation actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    jestli ano,
    urcite se budou lepe venovat svym serverum.. a nejen tomu nasledujicimu :-)

    ...meaning:

    if yes,
    they will take better care of their servers.. and not only of the one mentioned bellow :-)

    ...which means that the mail.sco.com server isn't the only one compromised.
    neat.

  42. McBride and capitalism by penguin7of9 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Darl McBride, capitalist crusader against the commie horde of Linux users

    There is nothing "capitalist" or "fundamentalist" about McBride--his is a campaign of lies and stock manipulation, and McBride's company is apparently engaging in intellectual property theft. Like so many other dishonest people before him, he is hiding his misdeeds by accusing his opponents of being un-American and communists.

    There is nothing "communist" about Linux. Linux has thrived in free market economies because it's a highly efficient way for commercial entities to develop software. Linux is about free markets at their best: goods being produced at marginal costs, which, in the case of software, happens to be zero.

    1. Re:McBride and capitalism by sevensharpnine · · Score: 1

      While your argument isn't necessarily false, I think you missed the point here. If you had read the rest of the article you probably wouldn't have posted this. The headline is not a value judgement against the CEO or linux users--it's an intentionally over-emphasised statement to give you a glimpse of what it looks like from SCO's point of view. Reading the Economist requires a higher level of comprehension than slashdot, and you need to keep that in mind when following links. Slashdot is written for roughly the middle-school level of reading comprehension (a rough guess), while some of the sites linked here presume a readership that's well-read. Sometimes it's like switching from first to fourth gear.

      --
      "God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh." -Voltaire
    2. Re:McBride and capitalism by tconnors · · Score: 1

      Darl McBride, capitalist crusader against the commie horde of Linux users

      There is nothing "capitalist" or "fundamentalist" about McBride--his is a campaign of lies and stock manipulation, and McBride's company is apparently engaging in intellectual property theft. Like so many other dishonest people before him, he is hiding his misdeeds by accusing his opponents of being un-American and communists.

      There is nothing "communist" about Linux. Linux has thrived in free market economies because it's a highly efficient way for commercial entities to develop software. Linux is about free markets at their best: goods being produced at marginal costs, which, in the case of software, happens to be zero.


      Umm.... "Sarcasm".

    3. Re:McBride and capitalism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > There is nothing "capitalist" or fundamentalist"
      > about McBride ...

      Huh ? He's upping the stock value of his company
      using a suicidal method - seems to fit the fundie
      (suicidal method) capitalist (cares for his share-
      holders) definition like no other.

      Now, we - the Linux people - are relying on the
      SEC to unfold this scheme; but the SEC is just
      a socialist big government invention to curtail
      real capitalists.

      Toon Moene (current GNU Fortran maintainer)

    4. Re:McBride and capitalism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I think McBride is a PERFECT example of capitalism gone wrong. He's just following in the footsteps of his previous idols, you know, the Enrons and WorldComs of the world. Lie, cheat, steal, greed, etc.


      As for reading comprehension levels, that might make an interesting survey, since I think it might turn out to be roughly evenly split betwen high school nerds reading /., and college/university grads reading /. One group reads the Economist, (college/univ. grads), while the other group (high school teenage computer geeks) have never heard of it. :-)


      (Marketing/advertising idiots, get lost! :-))

    5. Re:McBride and capitalism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are not familiar with the USA brand of capitalism my friend....

    6. Re:McBride and capitalism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The Economist is a British publication. The British have a concept called "irony", which American readers often don't understand.

    7. Re:McBride and capitalism by Crispy+Critters · · Score: 1
      "There is nothing "communist" about Linux."

      I think many people fail to understand the context of the GPL and RMS's ideas. They are not against capitalism at all. But the key is to realize the difference in point of view. The GPL rejects the idea of software as a piece of property that can be owned (more or less). Instead, the market should be oriented toward payment for the service of writing software. If IBM wants Linux to run on its hardware, it should be ready to pay for the services of people to write the code to do this. The philosophy is that people should be paid for writing code, not for "owning" code.

      This seems strange in today's world partly because of the shift to shrink-wrapped software. It was assumed that people would pay to get software to do what they wanted. People now mostly accept what is offered to them, and adjust their expectations instead. This makes it difficult to pay someone for writing code as separate from paying someone for "owning" code.

      The GPL is not anti-capitalist if you refuse to let companies like MS define your terms for you.

    8. Re:McBride and capitalism by penguin7of9 · · Score: 1

      While your argument isn't necessarily false, I think you missed the point here. If you had read the rest of the article you probably wouldn't have posted this.

      I did read the entire article.

      The headline is not a value judgement against the CEO or linux users--it's an intentionally over-emphasised statement to give you a glimpse of what it looks like from SCO's point of view.

      I was responding to McBride's point of view.

      Reading the Economist requires a higher level of comprehension than slashdot, and you need to keep that in mind when following links. Slashdot is written for roughly the middle-school level of reading comprehension (a rough guess), while some of the sites linked here presume a readership that's well-read. Sometimes it's like switching from first to fourth gear.

      Perhaps if you weren't so eager to find fault in others, you'd get more out of what you read yourself.

      As for the Economist, yes, it is somewhat better written than the average US publication, but, come on, it's not exactly complex prose. After all, a large part of its audience is financial types, who don't exactly value picking apart complex sentences, not intellectuals or academics.

      Besides, it is unwise for a publication like the Economist to put "intentionally over-emphasized statements" in bold face and without quotation marks on the top of their pages because there are lots of people who, unlike me, don't read the entire article. And there are lots of people who won't hesitate to quote out of context: "The Economist described the fight between Linux and SCO as...". But perhaps that is something the Economist still needs to learn from those US publications aimed at "a middle-school level of reading comprehension".

    9. Re:McBride and capitalism by penguin7of9 · · Score: 1

      Americans understand irony. But Americans also understand that irony is misplaced in the discussion of important matters because it leads to misunderstandings and allows people to quote out of context.

      So, either the Economist's use of irony was out of line, or they simply don't consider what's happening between SCO and Linux to justify more than having a little bit of editorial fun. Either possibility warrants a non-ironic response.

    10. Re:McBride and capitalism by dontbgay · · Score: 1

      There is nothing "capitalist" or "fundamentalist" about McBride--his is a campaign of lies and stock manipulation, and McBride's company is apparently engaging in intellectual property theft.

      What's un-capitalistic about that? ;]

      red-blooded american through and through

      --
      Sig not found.
  43. Nice! Now along with commies we'll be HACKERS by Gregg+M · · Score: 4, Insightful
    SCO needs to change the password on their mail server: sco.txt.

    Please.. Do you know what that will look like to the rest of the world? Maybe Michael should read the Linux Advocacy FAQ, or at least what not to do!

    --
    Linux is only free if your time has no value. Windows is only free if you threaten to use Linux.
  44. Re:business -- Do not threaten by screenrc · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Threatening lawsuits is dangerous! Don't threaten them, just do it.


    If you decide to sue SCO for extortion, go to
    the courthouse and ask the judge to issue
    declerative judgment saying that SCO cannot
    require payment since you are just an end-user
    (and not a Linux distributor) and you have
    never shown proof why SCO should demand money
    from someone they have never had a prior business relationship.


    If a few hundred/thousant linux users win
    a declarative judgment just like that, then
    we should be in a better shape.


    (As for me, I am still waiting for SCO to sure me. SCO,
    if you are listening, and I have posted it at least
    5 time on slashdot already, please contact me
    via ntro at earthlin dot [NET] . Let's get started!)

  45. SCO Story Random Comment Generator by StickMang · · Score: 5, Funny

    I've created a random comment generator for stories about SCO, with Slashdot in mind. All you geeks with no ability to write +5 Funny articles, here's your savior. Have fun!

    1. Re:SCO Story Random Comment Generator by tekrat · · Score: 2, Funny

      Title: Charge them with mail fraud!

      Body: Soon we'll hear zillion infinities lines plus their dads being bigger than our dads. I found IBM wanting to reduce my hourly rate for SCO bashing as so many people are willing to do it for free! Shhh! You are breaking my concentration! I'm trying to shed a bitter tear for them. And we certainly don't want to mash the SCO executives into a bloody pulp, either. Looks like Dennis' check from IBM finally cleared. This is like the director (?producer, someone else) of Gigli getting quoted as saying "I've seen worse movies [than Gigli]"

      Man, this rocks! Thank you for the comment generator!

      --
      If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
    2. Re:SCO Story Random Comment Generator by FuzzyBad-Mofo · · Score: 1

      Those comments aren't random, they appear to be quotes taken directly from Slashdot and probably other message boards. For shame!

    3. Re:SCO Story Random Comment Generator by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      more like they look like combinations of them.

      which is quite much actually what the comments coming nowadays to sco stories look like because it's always basically the same story..

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  46. All as it takes... by heironymouscoward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Damn it, I swear I read this as:

    All as it takes is one sanguine penguin to turn the tide...

    And this bizarre mental image of a sanguine penguin explaining to Mr Gerstner what the future looked like and why it involved lots of ice and fish.

    --
    Ceci n'est pas une signature
    1. Re:All as it takes... by EvilAlien · · Score: 1
      Wasn't that a scene in Fight Club?

      Slide, Gerstner!

      --
      perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5, (41*2), sqrt(7056), (unpack(c,H)-2), oct(115), 10)'
  47. Contribute your thoughts about SCO? by 40ohms · · Score: 1

    Take a test... How about a short test on your thoughts about the SCO matter? The test can be found HERE.

    1. Re:Contribute your thoughts about SCO? by Queuetue · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure what your company does - your motto, "Our Team Is Ready To Improve Your Company's Marketing Success" doesn't indicate you do anything.

      I hope no one is pinheaded enough to give you their name and address so they can take a 4-question quiz...

  48. Clarification by damas · · Score: 1

    Suppose my copyright is registered.

    1. Re:Clarification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Suppose my copyright is registered.

      Then you can sue in Federal court. You can either sue for actual damages or statutory damages. "Statutory damages" means that you don't have to prove any actual damages, you use an amount that's specified in the copyright law.

      Here's some reading:

      Copyright FAQ

    2. Re:Clarification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't sue for copyright infringement in small claims court. That is a federal matter and there is no such thing as small claims court for federal matters.

  49. Re:sco.txt fake ? by Nikademus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If the password line is true, they know they have been cracked, so they probably have changed the pass anyway.

    --
    I gave up with the idea of an useful sig...
  50. Smelly Crotch Orifice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wooo!

  51. A translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's *spelled* S C O, but it's pronouned "ass hats". I can't decide which is funnier - the point about IBM orchestrating all the outrage, or the point that SCO is somehow more "relevant" to the tech community because they've filed a bunch of press releases!

  52. I Got Sued By SCO...... by ZenJabba1 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Anyone have a guess as to who these McBride sources are? My hunch is Miss Cleo. And we certainly don't want to mash the SCO executives into a bloody pulp, either. I pictured an IBM semi-trailer rumbling down the highway, with an SCO chicken (looked like Darl with feathers) standing at the other end of a straight, squaking furiously at the oncoming behemoth. The chicken doesn't stand a chance.

    http://www.rageagainst.net/links.php

    --
    `find / -name "*your_base*" -exec chown us:us {} \;`
  53. But some of us are already hackers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If we obtained unauthorised access to SCO's mail server, then we would be CRACKERS.

  54. Heard from a IBM suit at a demo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One of Gerstner couselors said to him years ago "if we don't start to care about (work on) Linux now, we are making the biggest error in our company life".

  55. Daily? by bj8rn · · Score: 1

    Man, it's more like coffeebreakly (Geek Code grammar qualifier: g----, I am GWB). Like someone already put it a few weeks ago - morning coffee break, morning SCO story; lunch coffee break, lunch SCO story etc.

    --
    Hell is not other people; it is yourself. - Ludwig Wittgenstein
  56. Re:Who cares??? (ESR cares) by screenrc · · Score: 1
    Well, there a people who find benefit from the SCO vs. IBM
    lawsuit and will be very sad if it stops.


    Eric Raymonds is a good example.


    Eric: SCO claims there was not DoS last Friday. (See GrokLaw ,
    yet you blame it on Linux without providing evidence,
    then declared yourself general. No comment.

  57. The SEC? by w42w42 · · Score: 2, Informative

    The last article looks like it'd be of interest to the SEC, though I'm not going to hold my breath on that one.

    1. Re:The SEC? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Your right.

      My first thought was that Cohen and Royce and Associates derve a visit from the SEC just like MorganStanleyDeanWitter and the other Wall Street banks got.

    2. Re:The SEC? by GoofyBoy · · Score: 1

      CNBC, and alot of other television media, always has a disclosure if the anaylst personnaly, his firm or his immediate family owns the stock.

      And with everything, if they don't state it either way, like the article you linked to, you don't assume that he doesn't. Well, at least experienced investors do.

      --
      The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
  58. What if? by damas · · Score: 1

    The GPL is an agreement so I do not claim copyright infringement but violation of this agreement.

    1. Re:What if? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The GPL is an agreement ...

      Now it gets interesting. What has SCO done which shows that they agreed to this agreement?

      They haven't sent you a signed contract, or have they? I keep asking this, and you keep refusing to answer it.

      All SCO has to do is, well, NOTHING, and they have not accepted the GPL. At that point you have no agreement with SCO. Then you can sue them for copyright inringement, but you can't sue them for contract violation, because they never agreed to a contract with you.

    2. Re:What if? by damas · · Score: 1

      They have sold the kernel containing this agreement and in particular my copyright notices for about 4 years. They have the GPL on their site. They have supported the linux kernel, contributed works to the GPLed kernel, placed code under the GPL, had press releases that boast contributing to the kernel (under the GPL).

    3. Re:What if? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Okay, so SCO sold copies of your copyrighted works for four years. (Mine, too -- and I have more than 10-20 lines in the kernel).

      Either SCO accepted the GPL, or they have a contract with you besides the GPL (do they?), or they are infringing your copyright, or the GPL is invalid.

      The trouble is that you don't get to choose which of those alternatives is true. SCO gets to choose between "accept GPL" or "infringe your copyright", assuming that the other two alternatives are out. And they don't have to tell you which alternative they've chosen.

      What you could do is: (1) register your copyright. (2) collect evidence that SCO distributed your work after the registration date on the copyright. (3) Send SCO a registered letter demanding that they tell you whether they are accepting the GPL or not. (4) Wait a while. (5) Send SCO another registered letter, a cease-and-desist. (5) Wait some more. (6) Sue SCO for copyright infringement.

      If you sue in Federal court, and you go in half-assed, and David Boies walks all over you, then SCO gets a good precedent. It's much better for the Linux community if the first few people who sue SCO have a very clean factual case and very high-powered lawyers.

    4. Re:What if? by Tsu+Dho+Nimh · · Score: 1
      " The GPL is an agreement so I do not claim copyright infringement but violation of this agreement."

      That becomes a violation of a contract, which has to be done in something highre than a small claims court.

    5. Re:What if? by damas · · Score: 1

      How about:

      (1) register your copyright. (2) collect evidence that SCO distributed your work after the registration date on the copyright. (3) Send SCO a registered letter demanding that they comply with the GPL. (4) Wait a while. (5) Send SCO another registered letter, a cease-and-desist. (5) Wait some more. (6) Sue SCO for GPL infringement in Small Claims Court.

      Advantages: you don't have to deal with a lawyer of your own. The judge - given the alternative - the GPL (which is civil) or infringement (which is criminal) of copyrights will probably pick the first as valid.

      If you win you get the money and a trail of paperwork for others to follow and get their money.

      If you lose you have to pay about 200$ court expenses. No legal precedent is constituted (I believe).

    6. Re:What if? by damas · · Score: 1

      Small Claims Courts have jurisdiction over civil disputes with claims under a certain limit (depending on the state). Even if it's violation of contract. I don't know if the GPL classifies as a contract - more as an agreement.

    7. Re:What if? by shaitand · · Score: 1

      Yes they have, they distributed this code under the terms of the gpl... not to mention several press releases and other statements while they were still complying. It would be pretty hard for them to claim at this juncture that they never entered into the contract... if they did, even though a decision in small claims court sets no precedent, the transcript of their testimony could then be used to persue them in a copyright infringment case...

      If SCO did nothing they wouldn't have entered into the contract, but they did so something, they distributed the code under the terms of the contract you claim they "didn't" enter into.

  59. There is only one last possibility by sdack · · Score: 1

    SCO has been infiltrated by Scientology. They see potential in the three letters S, C and O.

    1. Re:There is only one last possibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Scientology is still looking for that tricky Major Domo and his FTP server at 127.0.0.1.

    2. Re:There is only one last possibility by shaldannon · · Score: 1

      I wish it had been infiltrated by Scientology. Right now Darl is giving Mormons a bad name :(

      --


      What is your Slash Rating?
    3. Re:There is only one last possibility by buford_tannen · · Score: 1

      Right now Darl is giving Mormons a bad name :(

      Indeed. I got into an argument with some of my Mormon relatives from Utah at my family reunion this summer. Wasn't pretty. I don't know why they love SCO so much. I guess they just can't see the truth.

      (And no, they do not and have not ever worked for SCO/Caldera afiak. But they have been following the case.)

      --
      Buford "Mad Dog" Tannen
    4. Re:There is only one last possibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Giving morons a bad name? Their name couldn't be any worse. Just yesterday two of them came knocking on my door trying to convert me (for a toaster, I'm sure). I promptly sent them on their way.

    5. Re:There is only one last possibility by shaldannon · · Score: 1

      I'm a non-Utah mormon so maybe that helps me see the truth more clearly that not everything from Utah is saintly :)

      --


      What is your Slash Rating?
  60. 100,000,000,000 press releases! by tekrat · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Shhh! You are breaking my concentration! I'm trying to shed a bitter tear for them. Anyone have a guess as to who these McBride sources are? My hunch is Miss Cleo. Oh SCO would just claim the virus code was their IP all along, and claim license fees from everyone who's still running it - people whose IP they can get easily as it keeps contacting their website!

    This Comment was generated with the Comment-O-Matic for SCO Stories.

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
  61. Coming Soon: More Of The Same by NickFortune · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Yep - and I predict it will continue to do so.

    I think SCO have two strategies here. The main payoff is the licence money paid to them by Microsoft. If they want to safeguard they're only reliable source of income, they need to keep the FUD coming. That means slow development, but a constant sense of threat for IT managers thinking of investing in Linux. The second string, of course, is that they manage to distort the facts enough that they get awarded the rights to linux and can start selling it.

    Now then, for the first strategy, going to court would be a disaster. They have _no_ case apart from FUD, and as they are rapidly learning, the open-source community are not so naieve or so inept as to let themselves be brushed aside in the legal arena. If it comes to court they'll lose - and that's the end of their income stream.

    On the other hand, it it goes to court and they win, and adopt strategy two - then Microsoft crushes them like a bug, takes the rights to linux and embraces and extends it into oblivion. Once again - end of income stream, and end of SCO. Which isn't to say that Darl McBride won't get some sort of reward from Little Willie Microsoft, but it'd be a bad move for SCO, and bad for SCO investors.

    Meantime, we have to keep countering the FUD without dropping the ball, image-wise; a tesk that gets harder as time moves on and peoples attention spans start to time out.

    Meanwhile, IBM are playing the game cautiously. They may as well - SCO aren't hurting them, but may yet have a trick or two to play. IBM's best strategy is to emulate the mills of the gods and grind "slow, but exceedingly fine".

    Nope, I can see this one might run and run.

    --
    Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
  62. SCO's business plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Ok, I'm not an economist, but am I the only one thinking SCO's business plan looks something like:

    1. ???
    2. ???
    3. Profit!

    ?

    1. Re:SCO's business plan by mec · · Score: 4, Informative

      Ummm, yeah, you're the only one who thinks that. :)

      SCO's business plan:

      1. Sell $12 million of UnixWare and OpenServer, at a cost of $14 million. Loss of $2 million.
      2. Sell $8 million of "SCO Source" licenses to Microsoft and Sun, at a cost of $2 million. Gain of $6 million.
      3. $4 million profit !

      SCO has executed this business plan successfully for two quarters now. Read their quarterly earnings announcements at finance.yahoo.com. It's right there. They are already in stage 3 and have been there for six months.

      Now, in Step 2, what are Microsoft and Sun getting for their $8 million per quarter? They are getting anti-Linux FUD. Linux takes sales from Microsoft and Sun, and this is a way for Microsoft and Sun to attack Linux without getting their own hands dirty. That's the value-add of using SCO as a sock puppet.

      Darl's bragging about the number of press releases from SCO rather than products and customer wins. Well, in my opinion, future "license payments" from Microsoft and Sun may very well be based on the number of anti-Linux press releases that SCO puts out!

      Canopy, the parent company of SCO, also has a business model based on suing other companies: $150 million lawsuit settlement from Microsoft, $40 million lawsuit settlement with Computer Associates.

    2. Re:SCO's business plan by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

      Also: SCO's CEO, Darl McBride, brags about having sued his previous employer for a 7 figure settlement.

    3. Re:SCO's business plan by PhilTR · · Score: 1

      Pam Jones at Groklaw did some fascinating research into who may be funding SCO.

      It seems that that Integral Capital Management companies as of this August own a total of 1,360,000 shares in SCO.

      Drugstore.com's 10Q, their most recent one, just filed this month, is another company Integral has invested in heavily.

      Melinda French Gates was just elected a director of Drugstore.com.

      Pam points out:

      As of last December, Integral Capital Management V didn't own any SCO stock, according to this SEC filing. They did own Microsoft stock back in November. But they didn't the previous May of 2002. So the chain of investment timeline appears to go like this: First, they invested in Drugstore.com, then Microsoft, and then in SCO.

      It's a good read.

    4. Re:SCO's business plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know who may be paying license fees to SCO and neither do you. Unlike you, I actually bother to read what SCO reports and they don't name any names. There is nothing in the Yahoo finance pages which suggests MS or Sun are making payments to SCO. There is nothing in current or past SEC filings which suggests MS or Sun are supporting SCO.

    5. Re:SCO's business plan by mec · · Score: 1

      You're poorly informed. Sun confirmed that they are the first licensee here:

      Sun expands Unix deal with SCO

      There is nothing in current or past SEC filings which suggests MS or Sun are supporting SCO.

      You're also a liar. I've got your SEC filing naming Microsoft right here.

      SCO 10-Q

      Page 21: "The second license was to Microsoft."

      Unlike you, I actually bother to read what SCO reports.

    6. Re:SCO's business plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You missed my point because I expressed it poorly. The MS and Sun licenses were done several months ago and were quite likely one-time deals. Your post wonders what MS and Sun are getting for their $8M per quarter. There's no suggestion in the filings that either of those companies is paying SCO anything on an on-going basis.

    7. Re:SCO's business plan by shaitand · · Score: 1

      SCO and microsoft both have made public statements that microsoft purchased a license "to avoid any possible infringments".

  63. You read my mind by corebreech · · Score: 5, Funny

    Seriously, when I saw the title, SCO Roundup, my first thought was that somebody rounded up all the SCO executives and were now patiently waiting for someone else to come up with a suitable way of disposing of them.

    There's a /. poll in there somewhere.

    1. Re:You read my mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I vote 2nd amendment with #8 birdshot, so they would have to shot multiple times for max pain.

    2. Re:You read my mind by Zork+the+Almighty · · Score: 1

      Sinatra to McBride : "You better knock this pinko lawsuit crap off, or it's ring-a-ding-ding for you bozos !"

      --

      In Soviet America the banks rob you!
    3. Re:You read my mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, when I saw round of of SCO I thought the SEC might have rounded up the SCO for stock manipulation and fraud. If nothing else, a conspiracy to defraud business claiming they have to license Linux/UNIX all over.

      There is lots of grease to fry SCO.

      But a survey might ask:

      Should the SEC/FBI investigate stock maniuplation and fraud by SCO?

      Does SCO have a valid claim?

      Did your company pay SCO licnse fee for Linux? (Names please so we can laugh).

  64. What about David Boies? by wille_faler · · Score: 1

    Am I the only one who feels pretty calm about this whole thing when SCO has David Boies as their lawyer? Government vs. Microsoft, Gore vs. Bush, Napster vs. RIAA ring any bells? The guy never seems to win, and if he ever does win, the wins dont accomplish anything.. When a guy who wouldnt even score with a $5 prostitute is representing them, at least I am sleeping pretty well. Disclaimer (just as well, when talking about a lawyer): I am not claiming Boies would ever even think about trying to score with a prostitute, it is just a metaphor for his "successes" in high profile cases..

    1. Re:What about David Boies? by ultrabot · · Score: 1

      I am not claiming Boies would ever even think about trying to score with a prostitute,

      Perhaps he could get a bargain deal on the grounds of being one himself?

      --
      Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
    2. Re:What about David Boies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My guess is that David Boies is a dope when it comes to operating systems and other software. If he is anything like the other lawyers I have seen, he can barely boot into windows and retrieve his e-mail (if he uses e-mail, that is). I do think the dude is crafty when it comes to money- and am wondering what his payoff is supposed to be if nothing comes out of this action against IBM....Certainly, being recognized as the architect of the silliest IT lawsuit in years isn't much of a payoff.

  65. Re:IBM on the right side? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hardly think a company planning on outsource 15,000 jobs is on the right side of US IT

    Yep. Everyone knows it's in the interests of US IT to use the most expensive labor they can find and thus inflate their product prices. Sure, this is the exact same stupidity that has destroyed so much domestic industry in the past but, hey, the interests of US IT is not in surviving long term but in giving YOU a job short term, right?

  66. Re:sco.txt fake ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only reason to use crypt passwords today is because you had to carry hundreds of users forward, and was not willing to re-issue a new password.

    Even then, there are ways to convert many users without them ever knowing. If they use POP3, FTP, or anything else that sends the password in the clear, rip open the daemon and add a bit of code. After the part where it does the pw auth and succeeds, check to see if it's an old DES hash.

    If it is, take the known-good plaintext that's in your buffer and make a MD5 crypt of it right there. You're obviously running as root since you just checked the passwd file, so create a script somewhere safe that does the right usermod call and let the admin (that's you) run it later.

    Your most active users will get converted right away, and any stragglers will eventually filter through. After a few weeks or months, anyone who still has a DES password probably isn't using their account. For those people, you can just lock their account and it'll work itself out through the usual "I forgot my password" channels. In many cases you end up deleting people who slipped through the cracks of the personnel list.

    I did exactly this when converting a box from BSD/OS to Slackware. My users never noticed.

  67. Re:Who cares??? (ESR cares) by idiotnot · · Score: 1

    Because ESR is a publicity-hound troll. "Um,
    yeah, so, like, I heard from the guys who were doing it. I told 'em it wasn't cool 'stop, yo,'and they were like, 'okay.'" Ummhmm. Right. I wonder if he'll stick to the story when the FBI comes looking for the e-mail. DDoS is a crime, remember. ESR, last time I checked, isn't a priest or a reporter....

    McBride is mistaken -- Free Software users and producers aren't Communists. There are a few idealists who swallow everything like RMS. There are the pragmatists who use GNU/Linux or the BSD's because there's nothing better commercially (IBM, The Debian project, the BSD's), there are the enthusiasts who just dig computers (me, probably 90% of the rest of ./), and then there are the moochers, who contribute very little, but talk alot, giving lip service to the ideals without understanding them in the least (ESR, Anonymous Coward, "Open Source" advocates -- WinCE is "Open Source").

    Oh well.

  68. Jonathan Cohen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So is the SEC investigating Cohen or what? Seems like he's spreading the shit to push up the stock price.

    Is he still employed by CNBC? It seems like a huge conflict of interest.

  69. Reformulated Claim by damas · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Suppose:

    1. I am a small time kernel contributor. I have about 10-20 lines of code in the linux kernel.

    2. My copyrighted work is available to SCO for distribution only under the GPL (which is a copyright licence).

    3. Caldera/SCO sold my code for 4 years (and complied to the agreement) - attach press releases detailing Caldera/SCO contributions to the kernel - including their praise of the GPL.

    4. As of May Caldera/SCO has breached the GPL as follows:
    4.a. Section 3 - SCO does not make the source code to the program available.
    4.b. Section 4 blah blah - SCO is licensing Linux.
    4.c. Section 6 somewhat disputable - accompany with SCO press releases - especially when they threaten to sue GNU/Linux users - again licensing.
    4.d. Section 7 - SCO continues to distribute although it seeks to apply additional retrictions through yet unfounded copyright claims - the key term of secton 7 is "believe" - SCO "believes" additional restrictions apply.

    Claims:

    They breached contract. My hourly consultant fee is 200$. It took me one hour to write it. I want 20$/loc + court expenses. Nothing else.

    Their guy:
    This is an obvious copyright dispute.
    Me:
    What do you mean? Do you mean you didn't break the GPL and you stole my copyrighted work?

    Their guy:
    We never agreed to the GPL.
    Me:
    If you didn't agree to the GPL then how come you sold my code for four years? Did you simply steal it?

    1. Re:Reformulated Claim by damas · · Score: 1

      A copy of Caldera's Open Linux will show that they agreed to the GPL regarding Linux as a whole and - of course - parts.

    2. Re:Reformulated Claim by mec · · Score: 1

      There's a lacuna here that kills your case.

      Yes, a lawyer working for SCO has opined in the media that the GPL is invalid under US Copyright Law. (And yes, I too think that he's full of shit, but that's not important).

      But, that does not prove that SCO has taken any actions which violate the GPL.

      You claim that "SCO does not make the source of the program available". That's a very serious charge. Please point to a program which SCO distributed which contains your copyrighted work and was NOT accompanied by the source code or a written offer to provide the source code.

      Because last time I checked, there were big linux source rpm's at ftp.sco.com, which means SCO is complying with the GPL for any linux kernel binaries that they distribute (that are built from that source). One of their lawyers says that the GPL is not legal, but it looks like SCO is abiding by its terms.

    3. Re:Reformulated Claim by shaitand · · Score: 1

      Last I checked regardless of claims of compliance, ftp.sco.com is not accessible and hasn't been for a fair amount of time... I have no reason to believe it ever will be again.

  70. Golden Tablets of SCO by Jonathan · · Score: 1

    Well, Joe Smith claimed he had found tablets of gold with holy writings -- he claimed that his "Book of Mormon" was a translation of these. Of course these tablets somehow "disappeared" before anyone but a few devotees actually had a chance to verify their existence. Perhaps that's the problem with SCO. The infringing lines of code were written on similar tablets....

    1. Re:Golden Tablets of SCO by Phroggy · · Score: 2, Informative

      Of course these tablets somehow "disappeared" before anyone but a few devotees actually had a chance to verify their existence.

      I found this letter from Professor Charles Anthon of Columbia College (now Columbia University) to be quite interesting. More here.

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    2. Re:Golden Tablets of SCO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He didn't just claim he translated them: he claimed he translated them with divine guidance, creating the most perfect book on earth. The trouble is that he copied sections of the King James Bible verbatim including mistranslations that have since been discovered from reviewing the Hebrew texts on which it was based. While Joe may not have infringed on any patents, he certainly was a plagiarist.

    3. Re:Golden Tablets of SCO by Larsing · · Score: 1

      ...claimed he had found tablets...with holy writings. ...these tablets somehow disappeared...

      I believe this very much infinges the patented business models of at least three world religions! :-)

      --
      Ethics is what you say you do. Morals is what you actually do.
  71. Just a thought by Gob+Gob · · Score: 1

    Who cares? Laws are upheld by people with guns, not by people doing the *right* thing because it is implied by law. If you respect IP law (or fear it) then you are controlled by virtual concepts - ideas controlling ideas. If you subscribe to this then what can (know how to) you do when they HUNT you down?

    If you have read anything you find an elegant (or otherwise) expression then feel free to use it as you see fit - to aid all or yourself, any language is to be spoken (compiled, heard, etc).

    Maybe if we stopped fearing concepts we could give the real world a better try.

  72. Ritchie vs Torvalds: Celebrity showdown ... by nexex · · Score: 1
    I pictured an IBM semi-trailer rumbling down the highway, with an SCO chicken (looked like Darl with feathers) standing at the other end of a straight, squaking furiously at the oncoming behemoth. The chicken doesn't stand a chance. But that's actually the same thing. I'm no expert, but having dreams about about somebody cutting your balls off and running off with them doesn't sound good to me! I pictured an IBM semi-trailer rumbling down the highway, with an SCO chicken (looked like Darl with feathers) standing at the other end of a straight, squaking furiously at the oncoming behemoth. The chicken doesn't stand a chance.

    This Comment was generated with the Comment-O-Matic for SCO Stories.

    --
    Winter 2010: With Glowing Hearts
  73. Re:IBM on the right side? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WTF does this have to do with the US ? This is about open source and closed source. I think IBM are a bit more involved than the US. In fact they are on the right side and the US has decided to back M$. Good for IBM, India deserve their support far more than the US, but that is not the issue.

  74. Sell SCO stock by lamber45 · · Score: 1

    As pointed out in the one article, SCO stock has gone up from under a dollar a share to over $15.00 (see for yourself). Sooner or later, either SCO will lose in court, or the hype from the spin-doctors will dry up, or both. Now would be an excellent time to sell SCO stock short and make a killing.

  75. Devout Mormon??? by Talence · · Score: 1

    Ok, so the line "and is a devout Mormon" caught my attention. Isn't there some kind of ethical code even in their branch of religion along the lines of "thou shalt not lie" or "thou shalt not extort"?? Either he's unaware of what he's doing or he's knowlingly paving his own path to the hell he believes in.

    --
    I plan to plan / Dutch course in The Hague
    1. Re:Devout Mormon??? by shaldannon · · Score: 1

      Yeah...Mormons (also known as Latter Day Saints, from the full church title (official web site here) are christians, which means the Ten Commandments apply. Actually, one of the things that we are supposed to be is "honest in our dealings with our fellow man." I'll let you be the judge of whether he's doing that, but speaking for myself, I think his Bishop should have a private chat with him about honesty.

      --


      What is your Slash Rating?
    2. Re:Devout Mormon??? by Salo2112 · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's a typo - he's a devout MORON.

    3. Re:Devout Mormon??? by Talence · · Score: 1

      Hi, thanks for your reply... several points:

      1) I was just priding myself on using my old account with a very low user ID, thanks for 'spoiling' that for me ;-) (note: added to friends list)

      2) (personal point of view) No person or group holds a patent on "good" or "bad". The fact that someone is "devout" in one thing or another does not make that person immune to enthusiastically engaging in what is generally (i.e. across (non-)beliefs and cultures) considered to be bad behaviour.

      3) You brought up an interesting angle... people should talk to his family, bishop, etc and get them to talk some sense into him. Also: if it can be proven through the courts that he was knowingly lying, would that be grounds for expelling him from his church?

      --
      I plan to plan / Dutch course in The Hague
    4. Re:Devout Mormon??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      if it can be proven through the courts that he was knowingly lying, would that be grounds for expelling him from his church?

      Absolutely!

    5. Re:Devout Mormon??? by ONOIML8 · · Score: 1

      " Yeah...Mormons (also known as Latter Day Saints, from the full church title (official web site here [lds.org]) are christians..."

      Weeeellllllll....sure. If you stretch the definition a bit. Ok, you have to stretch it a lot. But it seems you don't have to stretch it any more than SCO stretches the truth.

      --
      . Quit playing Monopoly with Bill. Switch to one of many non-Microsoft products today.
    6. Re:Devout Mormon??? by Talence · · Score: 1
      It's a typo - he's a devout MORON.

      That would indeed better fit the existing ideas about him ;-)

      --
      I plan to plan / Dutch course in The Hague
    7. Re:Devout Mormon??? by RealityShunt · · Score: 1


      Come on now, the mental image of Darl devouring Mormons is too funny to resist...

      realityshunt

      --
      Democracy is susceptible to being led astray by having scapegoats paraded in front of the electorate.
    8. Re:Devout Mormon??? by Laplace · · Score: 1

      I think his Bishop should have a private chat with him about honesty.

      Right after the conversation about how well he is carrying out God's work, as evidenced by his generous tithing.

      --
      The middle mind speaks!
    9. Re:Devout Mormon??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I resent the accusation that I am a moron. I have taken SCO stock from less than a dollar per share up to almost $15 per share, and cashed in lots of my shares and made lots of money- not like you Slashdot commies eating granola and dreaming of how to earn enough cash for your next baggie of illicit plant material. NOT ONLY THAT, MY EXTORTION LETTER, I MEAN MARKETING LETTER, BASED ON THE NIGERIAN/SIERRA LEONE MODEL WILL BE TREMENDOUSLY SUCCESSFUL AND WILL GENERATE TONS OF DOUGH FOR MY GANG...I mean company. SCO is a legitimate business and we are leading the fight against communists in operating system development.

      -D. MCBRIDE

    10. Re:Devout Mormon??? by shaldannon · · Score: 1

      Sorry to mess up the low user ID pride :)

      I agree that nobody has a monopoly on good or bad (unfortunately a lot of Utah Mormons don't realize that).

      Church procedures exist for expelling someone convicted of a felony. I'm not clear on the details since I haven't had to be a part of the process. In any case, it doesn't seem to me that McBride is doing this in innocence, which prompted my comments about his honesty and honor. We'll see what happens, but whether or not he pays for it in this life, rest assured he'll have to face up to it in the next life.

      --


      What is your Slash Rating?
  76. Re:sco.txt fake ? by MuParadigm · · Score: 4, Funny


    Nah, they'll just leave the server down for the weekend. It's cheaper than paying overtime for a tech. They need the money for lawyers.

    If they even know they've been cracked.

  77. Not the VESA bus, the EISA bus! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Right story, wrong consortium product. VESA is not a bus, it's a standard for a Super VGA BIOS. The EISA bus was defined by IBM's rivals.

    1. Re:Not the VESA bus, the EISA bus! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      VESA also defined a bus standard; the Vesa Local Bus (VLB) Rarely seen, little used.

    2. Re:Not the VESA bus, the EISA bus! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      VESA also defined a bus standard; the Vesa Local Bus (VLB) Rarely seen, little used.

      Oh, I don't know about that. For a while I saw quite a few motherboards with a VLB slot. I probably still have a few hiding in my closet, along with the multifunction I/O cards that went in that slot.

      It was EISA that was less often seen. EISA was used on the higher-end motherboards. I wouldn't call it rare, but it was more expensive and less common.

    3. Re:Not the VESA bus, the EISA bus! by cbreaker · · Score: 1

      You kidding me? VLB was used in almost every single late-model 486, some 386's, and even some early Pentiums. VLB was around for quite awhile before widespread PCI adaptation.

      Every single video board maker had VLB boards. I have a half a dozen of them in a drawer.

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
    4. Re:Not the VESA bus, the EISA bus! by cbreaker · · Score: 1

      Like someone else said, the "Vesa Local Bus" (known as VLB, Vesa slot, Local Bus slot) was used quite a bit in PC's before PCI became widespread. Every single late 486, 386, and even some early Pentiums had VLB slots.

      Don't you remember the slot? You'd have say 7 ISA slots, and three of them would have extensions on them (they looked like brown PCI slots.) Mostly used for Video boards.

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
    5. Re:Not the VESA bus, the EISA bus! by suicidal · · Score: 1

      The first PC I built myself was a 386DX-40 VLB.
      Yep, VESA Local Bus. VESA was also a local bus technology.

  78. Scopes Monkey Trial by AndroidCat · · Score: 1
    Just nit-picking, but Scopes initially lost the case ($100 fine, woo!). Later the Tennessee Supreme Court reversed it, but only on technical grounds. Hardly a decisive legal victory.

    Hopefully any victory over SCO will leave a smoking hole in the ground and no one will admit to ever having had the slightest thing to do with them--but that's just my little hope and dream. :^)

    --
    One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  79. OSS is in fact very much like communism. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OSS is noting like a barn rasing or bake sale, both of which I agree are nothing like communism. OSS however is very left and very much like communism. OSS and free software in general provide everyone with the code and the vast majority of OSS software is released with very little restriction on the redistribution (think GPL, Apache, and BSD licences). Changes for the most part are made by the community for the benefit of the community.

    I would just like to point out here that the reason communism and community sound a look similar as words is they share a common root, one of them is the root or something similar. Go find a linguist and ask them for the real low down, I'm just stating the obvious and cant be bothered to look it up.

    When you raise a barn for someone they get the barn, you get a warm feeling, maybe a meal, maybe even a pig come fall. As for the bake sale analogy, it is just ludicrous and I think you miss the point of communism. It's not about the lack of a sale, or the fact that the sale of the item goes to the betterment of the community, well it is, but more than that it's about the infrastructure and the means of production being owned by the community as a whole not being owned by a company. OSS is effectively just that. When you or anyone adds code to an OSS project you get the code, they get the code, we all get the code, and while not completely true to communism in that the code doesn't belong to the community and the author does maintain his or her copyright, the community is given very broad rights in it's use and dissemination. Effectively the code is owned for the benefit of the community, much as roads are owned and maintained by the government for your ease of travel, and as factories would be owned and maintained by the government in a communist society.

    McBride was right when he said that it is communistic, is sure is, it works, and the world and software in general is a better place for it. His use if the word communism was intended to spread FUD about linux and OSS by conjuring up the cold war demons, and playing off the western cultural mindset that communism is evil. It's not the corruptible people given absolute power were. Linux, and OSS in general is a shining example of the principles of communism applied and functioning.

    1. Re:OSS is in fact very much like communism. by damas · · Score: 1

      You're quite confused. A lot of OSS development takes place in corporations and a many more people get PAID for doing it.

    2. Re:OSS is in fact very much like communism. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You cant directly equate the two, but the fact commercial intent doesn't change the intent of the movement which is to provide better open software for the benefit if the community. Just as the need for food on a communal farm doesn't change the fact that the production of said food is for the benefit of the community.

      The point was that the infrastructure or the code is open and avalible to the community. It doesn't matter that this might be secondary to commercial gain from writing the software in the first place the point is that we all have it, the means to change it and the benefit from open sourcing the software in the first place.

  80. Re:sco.txt fake ? by leeet · · Score: 2, Informative

    If they have multiple Unix flavours and/or and NIS setup then they are most likely using crypt and not MD5.

    --
    -- Leeeter than leet
  81. Re:Who cares??? (ESR cares) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    ...then there are the moochers, who contribute very little

    Awww, come on, they fileshare porn sometimes. You gotta admit, that helps open source programmers!

  82. And from the other side... by DNAGuy · · Score: 1

    There is a Wired article quoting Darl McBride. Notably, "We're trying to work through issues in such a way that we get justice without putting a hole in the head of the penguin."

    I think maybe he overestimates the size of his gun

    --

    BRENT ROCKWOOD, EST'd 1975

    1. Re:And from the other side... by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1
      maybe he overestimates the size of his gun

      Are you insinuating that Darl has a dinky winky?
      A tiny weenie?
      A miniscule member?

      "Our power grid was just fine until it was shut off by dickless here."-Ray
      "Is this true?"-Mayor
      "Yes. This man has no dick."-Bill Murray

    2. Re:And from the other side... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "We're trying to work through issues in such a way that we get justice without putting a hole in the head of the penguin."
      Darl is a hands on kinda guy. He intends to strangle that bastard penguin Tux.
      "Here Tuxie, Tuxie. Uncle Darl has a herring for you...."

  83. MCDonalds by xcomm · · Score: 1, Informative

    >> Hit them in the pocketbook, as that is all they understand.

    What is with SCO's last really big costumer McDonalds?

    Write your McDonalds representative to change their systems to Linux. :-)

    The fallout of such a step from McDonalds should go through every business paper
    in the world and should be something the guys from IBM may know how to handle.

    Than let's have a look on the SCOX again.

    --
    'They are smoking crack.' --Linus Torvalds about SCO

    1. Re:MCDonalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      McDonald's is a big-time SCO user and no doubt will continue to be for years, because their back office application for all the US restaurants is intimately tied to SCO. It's been run on SCO products since Xenix.

      Unless people in McDonald's IT department are stupid, they're thinking about SCO alternatives.

    2. Re:MCDonalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We are!

  84. Time for a new icon by FuzzyBad-Mofo · · Score: 1

    How about changing the Caldera icon to appear rotten? Make it symbolize the zombified state of Caldera/SCO.

    1. Re:Time for a new icon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      One word:

      SCOtse.cx

      (Posting anon because some moderators can't take a joke)

    2. Re:Time for a new icon by FuzzyBad-Mofo · · Score: 1

      Ewww.

    3. Re:Time for a new icon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have always thought this old Caldera icon looks more like some world domination map... strange.

    4. Re:Time for a new icon by amacbride · · Score: 1
      You could always modify it to look like Pac-Man, only more sinister.

      (As an aside, the Pac-Man art exhibit from which the above image was taken is extremely cool.)

      -a

    5. Re:Time for a new icon by FuzzyBad-Mofo · · Score: 1

      As an aside, the Pac-Man art exhibit from which the above image was taken is extremely cool.

      That is interesting/cool. Coincidentally, I was just playing Pac-Man on the Namco TV Games thing. eerie :)

    6. Re:Time for a new icon by superchkn · · Score: 1

      Come on, it's not that bad...

      It's not like anyone is using the distribution anymore, is it? And if they are, don't they deserve a warning?

  85. Re:sco.txt fake ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    I can't remember how many years ago it became standard to use MD5 sums instead

    You mean common practice in Freenix land, not standard. POSIX standard Unix is DES.

  86. Code belongs to copyright holder, not community by mec · · Score: 1

    Communism is a system where it's illegal for me to choose my own license. The essence of communism is that I can take your property whether you ocnsent or not.

    The current world of OSS is not at all communist. I can write my code under any license I choose. I respect the right of other people to hold copyright in their creations and to choose their own licenses. And I honor the licenses of all copyrighted materials that I use.

    Almost every bit of OSS is legally copyrighted by specific people and corporations and nonprofits, not by a vague community. (Some bits are too small or too constrained to be copyrighted, and a few OSS authors actually do abandon their work to the public domain). I think this is natural and good and right.

    To draw an analogy, maybe you don't see a difference between the primary use of Napster -- copying other people's work without their consent -- and the primary use of mp3.com -- copying other people's work with their consent. In both cases, gigabytes of mp3's fly across the wires. But I see a huge difference. So do the copyright laws of almost every nation, per the Berne convention. And so do almost all business users of computers.

    It's all about consent.

    1. Re:Code belongs to copyright holder, not community by Pentagram · · Score: 1

      The essence of communism is that I can take your property whether you ocnsent or not.

      Well, not really. Communism says that words like "your" has no meaning when it comes to property, as property is collectively owned. Property is only owned by someone under capitalism because of the government rules that says it is. From some communist viewpoints, simply owning something is taking the community's property without consent.

    2. Re:Code belongs to copyright holder, not community by mec · · Score: 1

      Fine, instead of "your property", read: "bit patterns that you created". I trust you accept the word "you" as having a meaning? :)

      Let's see if we can get past the semantics and get to some actual cases.

      Suppose that I copy a Windows CD-ROM and give the copy to a friend. Right or wrong? I think it's wrong.

      Suppose that I copy a Linux CD-ROM and give the copy to a friend. Right or wrong? I think it's right.

      Suppose that I burn /vmlinux onto a CD-ROM and give the CD-ROM to my friend, without a copy of /usr/src/linux. Right or wrong? I think it's wrong.

      I look to the consent of the copyright holder as my moral compass. A Communist looks to a "community" to give consent or not. That's the difference between my moral system and a Communist moral system.

      I won't even go into the problem of who decides what the "community" is and who gets to voice the "community's" opinion.

      To tie this back to SCO -- part of SCO's FUD campaign is that open source developers routinely copy other people's code without consent of the copyright holder; that Linux developers are like so man Napster users; and our whole enterprise is based on wholesale code copying. This has great resonance with the worldwide business community and the worldwide media. I think that a Communist-based defense is not just morally wrong, but will also damage us on a practical level.

    3. Re:Code belongs to copyright holder, not community by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doesn't the GPL remove choice of licences for derivitive works?

      You've fallen into the intellectual property trap and equated an idea and a limited monopoly on it with something tangible. In a system where there isn't money you don't need copyright laws since you're fed regardless. Copyright laws exist to make sure that you can make a living from any work that you produce. In a capitalist system without copyright laws if I write a book any number of big publishers could just print it and not give me a cent. The answer is a form of monopoly on your idea. This doesn't exist in communism because it is unnecessary. As stated above you're fed regardless

      I'm not advocating communism as a form of government, but OSS is far more left than it is right (copyleft sound familiar?). The simple fact is that the software is there in a readable and modifiable form and is provided for the benefit of others. The use of the word community is generally considered appropriate when referring to the open source movement and was further used in this context to reinforce the link between the community and the leftist nature of OSS in general.

    4. Re:Code belongs to copyright holder, not community by mec · · Score: 1

      Doesn't the GPL remove choice of licenses for derivative works?

      No.

      Without the GPL, the author of a derivative work has no right at all to distribute the derivative work. The GPL grants a license with specific terms. Some people find these terms a delight, some people find them onerous.

      You've fallen into the intellectual property trap and equated an idea and a limited monopoly on it with something tangible.

      Again, no. I support copyrights intentionally, not as a trap. I support it, briefly, because that particular work did not exist before someone created it, therefore it's all theirs, not commons.

      I never claimed that bits are "tangible". That's your error -- to think that I do. I support property rights in bits, as well as property rights in atoms, but I don't claim that bits are atoms.

      In a system where there isn't money you're fed regardless.

      That's a whole another argument, but I will point out that the biggest mass starvations in history have taken place in societies were farmers did not have property rights in their land and their crops.

      OSS is far more left than it is right

      Sigh, again, no. At least we are back to an on-topic disagreement. :)

      Do I have to pay for OSS software, whether I use it or not? Obviously not. For comparison, show me any leftist economic system where I can opt out and not pay taxes for other people's services.

      Can other people take software that I write and convert it into any form of OSS without my consent? The GPL says no: see section 0. Linus Torvalds says no: "He who writes the code chooses the license". I can write an entire operating system and it's my choice whether to make it GPL or not. Again, show me a leftist economic system where I can build a factory and then I can choose how to use it and what to do with the output.

      OSS is an individualist laissez-faire system. It just happens not to use money. It is a community, like a church -- anyone can join and contribute, and many people do, but no one is forced to. That's the key difference between OSS and a leftist system.

    5. Re:Code belongs to copyright holder, not community by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is democracy not a body chosen to rule by the people? Don't they give their consent to the elected officials to make decisions, which include property and copyright laws?

      The point of the SCO argument was to tie the OSS movement to the word which generally has been portrayed by the media and western governments as evil (coldwar) at worst, misguided at best. It was to spread further FUD, and yes it was to nurture the idea that the OSS community is rife with copying and don't believe in IPR... but isn't this true? Doesn't it make more sense to explain the view, to explain that it's in everyone's interest to allow everyone to read it? Forget two sets of eyes we have millions.

      My work place creates proprietary software, it is unfortunate but we are a service based company in a crowded market and it can't be avoided since access to the software is all we provide. At work I use a lot of open source code in our software (Apache and BSD licensed since we're a Java shop and the LGPL taints Java code) however any improvements I make to these bits of code are sent back to the project in the hope they will be useful to someone else. Our primary motivation as a company is commercial, however we feel it is ethical to provide changes back to the community. There is no onus on us to do this (Apache/BSD licences), we do it as responsible members of the community that feel we have gained something and want to give back.

    6. Re:Code belongs to copyright holder, not community by mec · · Score: 1

      Democracy: a system where a majority can make decisions binding on a majority. Since you bring it up, I'm not a big fan of democracy. I'm more a Bill of Rights guy. I believe that people have many rights which a majority cannot override.

      The USA Patriot Act has majority support my country (don't know what country you're in). That doesn't make it right.

      How would you like it if a majority of people in your country voted on what operating system and application programs to use, and everybody had to run the majority choice? It would cut down on the compatibility problems. But I prefer a system where everybody makes their own choice, even though it's very undemocratic of me to run Linux.

      The point of the SCO argument ... was to nurture the idea that the OSS community is rife with copying and don't believe in IPR ...

      We agree on that. SCO is making that case, both legally and in their public relations. ... but isn't this true?

      No. Even RMS respects trademarks. All major OSS groups that I'm aware of (mostly FSF and Linux), respect other people's copyrights. I will accept the point for patents. There are significant OSS groups that are hostile to patents.

      As you say, there is no onus on your company to contribute back. Your company makes the choice. Under a leftist software economy, a government agency would make that choice.

      To me, it's all about who gets to make the choice. The actual choice that comes out is secondary. Just as it's okay for me to choose whether to spend $200 to buy a copy of Windows, but repugnant to me if the government takes $200 to pay for Windows, the democratic choice, as a public utility.

    7. Re:Code belongs to copyright holder, not community by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How can you say this:
      Doesn't the GPL remove choice of licenses for derivative works?

      No.

      then this:

      Can other people take software that I write and convert it into any form of OSS without my consent? The GPL says no: see section 0. Linus Torvalds says no: "He who writes the code chooses the license". I can write an entire operating system and it's my choice whether to make it GPL or not. Again, show me a leftist economic system where I can build a factory and then I can choose how to use it and what to do with the output.

      The choice has been removed, that was what the first line said and it is true. The GPL removes licencing choices for derative works, just like communism removes the ownership of property. In either case it must be provided for the benefit of the community.

      Your arguments about paying for the software meaning it's not leftist are just plain wrong. Leftwing is not defined as paying for something that others use. It's about doing, and yes can involve paying for, things that benefit the collective group whatever group that may be. If you chose not to use or support open source software then you are not part of the group. Just because I get and pay for health care in the UK and you dont in the US doesn't mean that free healthcare is not a leftwing ideal. You as part of a democratic country have chosen not to support healthcare and therefore are not part of the group that benefits from it. It's still left.

      And what about RMS, and the FSF refering to the GPL as copyleft? Are they wrong too?

      I support copyright in the spirit it was created as a means by which a producer could be given the means to support themselves on what they produce. I believe this is important to protect artists and producers in a capitalist society. I also with the laws on the fact that this should be limited to a reasonable period of time because you cant claim ownership of an idea in perpetuity, otherwise one day everything we will will find everything is a derivative work of something. Imagine the EULAs! :)

    8. Re:Code belongs to copyright holder, not community by mec · · Score: 1

      No, if you actually read the GPL, you will see that all of my copyrighted work remains my work and I can license it on any terms I want. See section 2: "If identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those sections when you distribute them as separate works."

      The GPL applies to derivative works only when they contain elements of the original work, which is not my property. It is Linus's property or the FSF's property. Without the GPL, I have no license to distribute additional copies of their property at all. With the GPL, I have more rights to distribute derivative works than I did before.

      The first two sentences of Section 5 state this explicitly. The GPL grants rights. It does not take any rights away. Without the GPL, I have no right to distribute the derivative work, because it contains a lot of Linus's code which I didn't write. With the GPL, I have a right that I didn't have before.

      And the power of the GPL to do this is grounded in the copyright of the original author, not in some decision made by people who didn't write the code.

      So, on to what "left" is. No one is forced to run OSS software, pay for OSS development, or contribute their own source code to OSS repositories. This makes it different from your National Health or our Social Security, where everyone with a job is forced to pay for a single system. OSS is more like a church, where anyone can start a church, and anyone can join and support whichever church they wish, or none at all.

      Do you consider churches to be left-wing organizations? I don't. I do, however, consider them to be community institutions.

      The "left" in "copyleft" is a pun on "right". Or do you think that only people on the political "right" can support "rights" such as free speech, free assembly, and universal voting?

      I support copyright in the spirit it was created ...

      I suport copyrights in capitalist societies and also in non-capitalist societies. I do agree with you the standards for patents should be much more restrictive than copyrights. I feel very secure that when I write some code, I am not going to accidentally produce an exact copy of some Microsoft code that I have never seen. But I am not at all secure that I won't re-implement some IBM patent that I have never seen.

    9. Re:Code belongs to copyright holder, not community by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All these arguements remind me of kids trying to put the blocks in the canister with the shapes on the top. We've got a square hole, a circlular hole, a star-shaped hole, and a rectanglular hole.

      Then we've got the pieces, a cube, a cylinder, a star-shaped block, and a rectangle block.. and then the hexigonal Open Source.

      Everyone seems to try to fit the hexigonal block into on of the holes, but it doesn't quite fit... The reason is we've yet to get people to realize that there needs to be another hole cut for Open Source. You can't stick it in any of the current holes and have it fit as it is something different all on it's own.

      Once people quit trying to jam it into the left or the right square or circle, or the communist star, or the socialist rectangle, maybe we'll see an end to these arguements.

    10. Re:Code belongs to copyright holder, not community by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, "left" (to me) means you MUST contribute to "society" rather than just "yourself".

      Free software says "you can contribute, or you can just take".

      Communism says "you must contribute so that others may take".

      Free software doesn't depend on "central power", so it is much less prone to corruption.

    11. Re:Code belongs to copyright holder, not community by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, I love this line of non-thinking:

      The GPL removes licencing choices for derative works, just like communism removes the ownership of property. In either case it must be provided for the benefit of the community.

      A can opener removes the right to keep the contents inside of the can, just like communism removes the ownership of property. Therefore, can openers are "communist".

      The GPL doesn't "remove" any right. You *never had* the right to distribute derivative works. It GRANTS you a right to re-distribute under certain terms.

      Since the right was taken away by the government, in the form of copyright law, the GOVERNMENT must be communist! Oy, Bush has some explaining to do!

      Your healthcare example doesn't make any sense either. If your tax money is going toward paying for OTHER PEOPLE'S health care, and you don't have a choice in the matter, then it's "left". One country or another doesn't matter because we assume most people don't jump from country to country whenever taxes are too high.

      Free software is very much like a free market: everybody is free to choose who they deal with, and everyone is free to contribute or not contribute, and the price of the software is based on marginal cost (i.e. nearly zero), much like washing machines or sandwiches or anything else tangible.

    12. Re:Code belongs to copyright holder, not community by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am the original AC for this thread and I completely agree with the core of what you've said. Free software gives you the OPTION to be a part of the community, that's the best part. I can give you my work, but it's my choice. That however doesn't make it any less left, the point of the whole discussion is the altruism and the sprit of providing my code to you is not in my interest but it the interest of the community. The communityas I define it is simply as the group of people that use or contribute to the code I have provided.

      In no way am I forced to take part, but this isn't a form of government this is a software movement, one has to draw a line with the metaphors somewhere. This as an active member of the OSS community is where I chose to draw it.

    13. Re:Code belongs to copyright holder, not community by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm the AC that started this all, but HEAR FUCKING HEAR.

      It is not a political movement, and to be honest I regret trying to equate it with one (but that was the thread) I for one believe it's more left than right but that is the spirit in which I release my code.

      OSS is something completely different for a world that has been fundamentally changes by the advent of the information age. To be honest I am a bit sad (it's late now and I'm also a bit drunk) that we in the tech community are still clinging to rightwing ideals. What happened to information wants to be free? We have built something that is much bigger than MS, Linux or even government. We build the systems everyone relies on, we are a product of our society and we are the information age. Stand up be heard and do something about it. They (whoever you think "they" are) can't do a damn thing without the systems we build. I am left wing, you might not be, but in my world that is your choice. I stongly believe in OSS, so much so that the GPL as a licence for my software is a non starter. It's a BSD derived licence for me. It's absolute freedom, you are completely free to do what you will with what I've created. Take it, break it, make it proprietary, I could care less as long as I've helped you. I get nothing from it, except knowing somewhere I helped someone.

  87. Dear Comrade McBride.... by mormop · · Score: 5, Insightful

    At a more general level (and surprisingly for a Linux distributor), he (McBride) found the entire free-software trend "communistic", he says: "We don't get the whole free-lunch thing."

    I still don't get the constant references from Gates, McBride et al about Linux being communist.

    In Soviet Russia which was communist in name if not nature, the provision of all goods an services was centralised in the hands of a few, huge agencies. These agencies excercised a vast amount of power over those it "served" and generally with property being theft and all that no-one could truly be said to own their their property, e.g. house, car etc. This basically constitutes the large organisations licencing the use of "their" property to the members of the society and as many dissedents found, these licences could be revoked along with the issue of a new one way licence to Siberia.

    The free enterprise west on the other hand, benefitted from competition between many decentralised comapanies, organisations and individuals that in some cases formed alliances and co-operated when it would benefit.

    If anything, the behaviour of the vast corporations bears more resemblance to the overpowering Soviet interpretation of communism than Open Source. On the other hand, open source follows the free market evolutionary pattern with projects popping into existence all the time with the weaker pointless ones falling by the wayside and the stronger useful ones maturing.

    The open source system negates the need for money as developers receive the kudos of a job well done ,a notch on their CV for them to earn bread with and the support of users who pay their way by submitting feedback, bug reports etc.

    In the meantime, please stop giving us this shit about open source and communism. The one thing it offers is freedom of choice and action. I don't remember the Russian people having much of that before the wall came down and I don't see that in any EULA from Microsoft, SCO or any other proprietry software company for that matter.

    --
    Hmmmmmm..... Deep fried and look like Squirrel.
    1. Re:Dear Comrade McBride.... by buford_tannen · · Score: 1

      I give you all my virtual mod points. You shamed me with your insightful remarks.

      I am still angry at Darl McBourgeoise, though! >:O

      --
      Buford "Mad Dog" Tannen
    2. Re:Dear Comrade McBride.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Communist and Communism are rhetoric that infer "evil boogymen" to many sympatheic to right authoritiarian ideals. In effect they hold "communism" to be part of an attack on their well organized conservative society. The irony here is that failed "communist" organizations resorted to extreme right authroritiarm method to retain power.

      Thus the real point here is infer that Linux and Freee/Open software is a plot by evil control freeks while side stepping the issue that certain software corporations may also be essentially evil control freeks.

      This is an attempt to manipulate converatives to the SCO cause.

    3. Re:Dear Comrade McBride.... by mormop · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Absolutely.

      Soviet Russia never resembled anything from Marx's communist ideal and to date, no "communist" country in the world has. Marx, like all political theorists was a dreamer who ignored the one wildcard i.e. human nature.

      At the end of the day, open source serves it's users and developers equally and I think this is what Uncle Darl and his type can't deal with. Like Stalin, Mao and all they are just power junkies who can't deal with not being in total control.

      I confess to being an enemy of the proprietry state. I confess to using Linux and Open Source software. I confess to having subversive thoughts that contradict the ideals of Chairman Gates. Now the show trials over can I go now pleae?

      --
      Hmmmmmm..... Deep fried and look like Squirrel.
    4. Re:Dear Comrade McBride.... by machine+of+god · · Score: 1

      What I want to know is, what is so wrong with communism. Can you give me a clear, logical answer? One that doesn't apply to capitalism? Anyone?

      I mean, Even if it were communist, so what?

    5. Re:Dear Comrade McBride.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Communism is a complete failure when compared to capitalism. Check examples of countries right alongside each other for most positive proof.

      In the 70's and 80's, West Germany (capitalist) was much more of an advanced society than East Germany (communist), and was the main reason "the wall came down".

      Look now at the Koreas. South Korea (capitalist) is much farther advanced that North Korea (communist yet starving people everywhere).

      While in theory, communism simply does not work when attempted in a real environment. Too many opportunities for corruption that are exploited and work against it's fundamental principles.

    6. Re:Dear Comrade McBride.... by Kalak · · Score: 1

      As I see it, here's the "logic" of calling OSS Communistic.

      To many (esp in the US) "communism" is the antagonist of "capitolism". "Capitolism" == "American" == doing things for money. OSS is not about doing it for money, but for the good of the community, so it must be Communist.

      I never said it was *good* logic, but I wouldn't be suprised if this was the root of the Communist argument.

      --
      I am, and always will be, an idiot. Karma: Coma (mostly effected by .hack)
    7. Re:Dear Comrade McBride.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      1) Corruption. When you put all the power into the hands of a few [trying hard *not* to think of microsoft and copyright law], they become corrupt. They begin to view the entire system as a vehicle for their own success.

      You might argue that this happens in the USA. Well, we do have corruption and power, but eventually the messes are cleaned up. Take a look at Enron, etc., it took a while, but finally the American people realized what was going on and demanded that the mess be cleaned up. That leads us to point #2:

      2) Democracy.. in America, the voice of the people can move the government. Sure it's not perfect but if the people want the government to change, it will change. That's designed into the system. Communism depends on people doing what the government wants, rather than the other way around. This leads to discontent and revolution.

      3) Inefficient allocation of goods. When it comes to distribution of tangible goods, Communism is a complete flop. Since people are working for "others" rather than themselves, even if they don't want to, they have no incentive to create or improve.

      Note that this differs from Free software, because in Free software, once you "bake a loaf of bread" (write a program), you can eat it yourself (meet your own needs) AND give it away (put it up on the net), without any cost to yourself. Then someone else can eat it too (solve their problem), and add a nice green salad (add a feature you didn't think of), and then everyone has salad and bread (merge the improvements). Or they are free to keep the salad to themselves (don't distribute changes).

      4) Crushes the human spirit. Ayn Rand and all that. Human beings have an individualist nature which is crushed and demeaned by Communism. Yes we have a "collective" nature as well, but freedom means you can *choose* how collectivist you want to be without government force. *Forcing* collectivism on people leads to problems as mentioned above.

      So Communism sucks, big time, and it's a shame that folks like McBride and Gates and GPL-haters bring it up as FUD. Communism is nothing like freedom, it is absence of freedom. Microsoft and SCO look more like communist leaders that Linus Torvalds and RMS.

    8. Re:Dear Comrade McBride.... by Crispy+Critters · · Score: 1
      "What I want to know is, what is so wrong with communism. Can you give me a clear, logical answer?"

      It just doesn't work. At a simplistic level, communism is an extension of how families often work. You will feed and house a four year old or a sick parent, even though they do not materially contribute. But people don't feel about everyone in the world they way they feel about their close family, so extending the economy of a family to a whole country or planet doesn't work. This may be related to family members building up trust over time, the "economy" being local so each member can observe it, and genetic hard-wiring.

      It is easy to find examples of human actions that prove that communism is unstable, because there are things that we effectively own in common. Think about the people who weave through tight traffic and make everyone else's trip longer. Look at how many people litter. Spam! There are enough people who abuse any common resource to make communism impossible.

    9. Re:Dear Comrade McBride.... by weston · · Score: 1

      I still don't get the constant references from Gates, McBride et al about Linux being communist.

      You know what else I don't get?

      Mr McBride, like several directors at Caldera, has worked for Novell and is a devout Mormon. He seemed a natural choice to rescue the firm.

      Let's assume for a moment that "devout Mormon" has any relevance. If it's true, when he says "We don't get the whole free-lunch thing," he's not only showing a fair bit of ignorance of open source software and communism, he's also ignoring some pretty basic facts about Mormon cultural history and doctrine. Despite the fact that the puritan work ethic always attached to LDS culture has become somewhat married in modern times to material success, there are some distinctly communitarian periods in the history, and some are still held up as an ideal to work towards. There's LDS scholar/theologian Hugh Nibley's classic essay "Work We Must But the Lunch is Free" which speaks at length to the concept which Darl says he doesn't get. One of the themes of the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants (two parts of LDS cannon) is the contrast between the pursuit of personal wealth at the expense of the rest of society vs a "Zion" society: one where everyone works, but those with more than enough contribute back to the community. And of course, you can find it in the Bible (also in LDS cannon)... for each emphasis on stewardship and property law, you can find another emphasis on community philosphy that starts to get into that "free lunch" kindof stuff Darl doesn't get (Darl: read up on the Jubilee year, and some property habits of the early Christian church, for example).

      This leaves aside the basic question of honesty, due dilligence, and integrity, of course. The visible elements of SCO's case seem vacuous; to press suit without merit or racketeer would be outside LDS gospel teachings.

      So in general, I don't see a whole lot of behavior on SCO's part that seems particularly in line with Mormon teachings as I understand them. I'm left to wonder if McBride's due dilligence when it comes to his spirtual practice is comparable to the understanding he's displayed of licensing issues.

    10. Re:Dear Comrade McBride.... by weston · · Score: 1

      One more thing... not enough of this aspect of Mormon theology/social theory is online... wish there was more... but here's an interesting article:

      http://w3.byuh.edu/academics/ace/Speeches/Mckay/ B_ Kimzey.htm

      "Work serves two purposes: first, to provide income through the production of goods and services, and second, to develop and utilize one's talents for self-improvement and satisfaction. Winners of lotteries are rarely happy when they quit working to pursue a life of leisure filled with the ability to consume without the necessity to produce. "

    11. Re:Dear Comrade McBride.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We at SCO, the bastion of the battle against communists in operating systems software development, now have your signed confession:

      I confess to being an enemy of the proprietry state. I confess to using Linux and Open Source software. I confess to having subversive thoughts that contradict the ideals of Chairman Gates. Now the show trials over can I go now pleae?

      Your reactionary stance will be punished! We will force you to use a proprietary, non-communist operating system like Windows or OpenServer for the rest of your life!

      You are probably also the wiseguy that sent me a jar of vaseline via UPS with an attached card telling me to give it to my cellmate Bubba when I get to the big house.

      -D. McBride

    12. Re:Dear Comrade McBride.... by demon · · Score: 1

      Personally, I've known a few Mormons. While they can be nice enough people, they're generally (IMHO) of a collusive and suspicious nature, often not wholly trusting or liking anyone who's not a member of the Mormon Church, and widely implementing the "good ol' boy" system that so many people love to hate. Maybe it's just me, but I don't think that "devout Mormon" is anything to brag about, at least not outside of Mormon country.

      --

      Sam: "That was needlessly cryptic."
      Max: "I'd be peeing my pants if I wore any!"
    13. Re:Dear Comrade McBride.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      After the fall of Communism, the living standard of most of the ex-Communist nations, including especially Russia, has declined from even its previous low level under the Communists. Corruption, crime, and instability have vastly increased. We only get the story here that the good guys won. It is not that simple.

    14. Re:Dear Comrade McBride.... by BlackBolt · · Score: 1

      Communist Russia did not fall on its own; they were "pushed" by aggressive US manipulation of international currencies and debt ratios. Google it if you don't believe me. Their system was as strong or stronger than ours (it's *designed* for incredible centralized strength), and we can fall just as easily if another superpower were to arise and be hostile towards our ethnocentric brand of capitalism. Yes, I hate communism, but alas, we are not invincible. Or even better. The pseudo-capitalist counterparts of East Germany and North Korea are better off solely because of Western money flowing in. And if you haven't found any "opportunities for corruption" in capitalism, you are from f**king Venus.

    15. Re:Dear Comrade McBride.... by mormop · · Score: 1

      Given the implied use I'd probably refrain from sending the Vaseline. Cylinder head valve grinding paste maybe, but not vaseline.

      --
      Hmmmmmm..... Deep fried and look like Squirrel.
  88. Communistic? by buford_tannen · · Score: 1

    At a more general level (and surprisingly for a Linux distributor), he found the entire free-software trend "communistic", he says: "We don't get the whole free-lunch thing."

    Communistic? I'd like to show Darl McBourgeoise what communism is all about!

    Who's with me?

    --
    Buford "Mad Dog" Tannen
    1. Re:Communistic? by borgheron · · Score: 1

      It's just more evidence of his refusal to understand the whole thing. He obviously doesn't "get it".

      GJC

      --
      Gregory Casamento
      ## Chief Maintainer for GNUstep
    2. Re:Communistic? by buford_tannen · · Score: 1

      Indeed it is. While I was simply trying to be funny, mormop posted a far more serious and insightful commentary outlining how ridiculous McBride's statement was.

      --
      Buford "Mad Dog" Tannen
  89. Mod Parent Up. by theTerribleRobbo · · Score: 0


    This post (-3, Troll) is brought to you by the letters 'i' and 'nformative'.

  90. All should file an on-line complaint to the SEC by BanjoBob · · Score: 1

    http://www.sec.gov/complaint/cf942sec9570.htm is the form to use. If we flood their mailbox with these what happens. It only took a week for the SEC to go after Martha Stewart - why so long for Darl?

    --
    Banjo - The more I know about Windoze, the more I love *nix
  91. give 'em hell darl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The article has it wrong. The open sores people are like the fundamentalists, thumping their copy-left bibles and ranting about "freedom."

    1. Re:give 'em hell darl by superchkn · · Score: 1

      McBride, what the hell are you doing on /.?!!

  92. welll... does it count if by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

    they released their own distribution of linux? Ie. the right hand is saying 'yes the GPL is good, here's a copy of linux' and the left hand is saying 'GPL bad, it's infringing on our copyright'. There's gotta be a problem with that somewhere

    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
  93. Yay! Daily SCO Hate Fest! by Greyfox · · Score: 1

    Say, didn't we all ask them some questions a while back? I thought there was supposed to be an interview. Where's our interview! I want my interview! Were our questions too hard for them?

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  94. Message from Bill Gates for SCO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bill Gates : McBride let me give some more humping since you are helping my crappy windows survive against linux. My son you will rewarded by the dark forces. You will bear the evil of M$.

    Hold on my www layers is protected by linux. Fuck you McBride.

  95. Re:sco.txt fake ? by Anonym0us+Cow+Herd · · Score: 4, Funny

    Nah, they'll just leave the server down for the weekend. It's cheaper than paying overtime for a tech.

    They will leave the server down for the weekend not due to cost issues, but due to PR issues. They want as much PR as they can get.


    Tuesday, September 2, 2003.

    At SCO headquarters this morning, SCO's CEO Darl McBride was quoted as saying: "Those evil hackers are still attacking SCO's superior Unix servers!". He then added "...and it's all IBM's fault!" "We know that IBM is behind this whole affair, including our poor security. We have evidence that proves it -- but we can't show it to anyone."

    "If we were to prove that IBM were behind the attacks on SCO, then the attacks would stop."

    --
    The price of freedom is eternal litigation.
  96. SCO is just a deception by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The whole SCO thing is set up only to divert the focus of the open source community away from the real issue, the European Patent law. That is going to be the real disaster, which is going on almost unnoticed while US open source people are just discussing the ridiculous SCO/IBM case.

  97. why is /var so big? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and /home so small in comparison?

    1. Re:why is /var so big? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and this is why you are an inexperienced sysadmin. /var is so large in case their logs fill up by slashdotters trying to crack into their server while no one is around for the weekend. if no users have to log into the mail server (and none should), why should you have a large home?

    2. Re:why is /var so big? by LinuxGeek · · Score: 1

      Perhaps because of /var/spool/mail, they must expect large amounts of mail on this mail server. If they were using a .maildir type spool, then /home would need to be much larger.

      --

      Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see. - Mark Twain
    3. Re:why is /var so big? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OR maybe because mail is stored in /var/spool/mail ?

      I can only hope you're joking, considering it's sapposed to be mail.sco.com .

      If you're not joking.. then all I can say is... dolt.

    4. Re:why is /var so big? by Jack+Auf · · Score: 1

      Exactly so.

      But I do kind of winder why /boot is 99M. I generally set boot at 30M at the most and have never come close to running out of room with 5 or 6 test kernels in there....

      Very odd

      --
      "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" - BF
  98. Re:sco.txt fake ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    please mod this up - this is exactly what came to mind as soon as I saw this.

    conspiracy theorists may even put forward that this is a honeypot designed to lure "linux hax0rs" into committing an illegal intrusion on their "system" to use as PR gimmick to further besmirch the image of Linux users as a bunch of free-loading, copyright-stealing, malicious subversive evil hackers bent on running legitimate software companies out of business.

  99. SCO's MIcrosoft connection? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Groklaw seems to have cracked the SCO-Microsoft connection.

    It certainly explains who has been buying SCO stock.

    I am shocked! Shocked, I tell you!

    1. Re:SCO's MIcrosoft connection? by FyRE666 · · Score: 1

      I've been following the news at Groklaw regarding SCO for some time now, and have submitted stories to /. several times (all rejected of course). The evidence has been piling up - shady companies pumping money into SCO despite the overwhelming bad news, directors appearing to be blatantly pumping stock prices. Third parties spewing FUD like no tomorrow. Personally though, I'm convinced Sun is playing a big part in working the SCO sock-puppet, not just MS...

  100. Economist Article by salesgeek · · Score: 1

    I wish that people would stop equating OSS with communism, because it is not the same thing at all. OSS is actually a development of capitalism, where the brutal facts of reality have converged:

    * Operating systems are not rare.
    * It costs very little to reproduce software.
    * It costs relatively little money to develop original software.
    * Capitalism says competition will drive price down.

    I would say that OSS is the ultimate result of capitalism: lowest cost goods.

    Reality is that OSS software is simply where the old artificial property economy (read: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY MONOPOLY RIGHTS)has failed. Darl is much like the monkey (or single celled organism) where OSS is simply species link or two up the evolutionary chain.

    Value is generated in IT by deploying a technology configuration to achieve a goal, such as reduced costs or enabling higher capacity. Software is one component of that value. Hardware is another. And the ability to converge technology, people and process to yeild value is where the real money is at. OSS lowers cost and provides better tools for building value. Period.

    $G

    --
    -- $G
  101. Not necessarily.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
    Read this.

    If Bill Gate's bucks are really behind SCO, you'd be shorting into someone with $50 billion to buy up SCO stock.

    You'd wind up taking it in the shorts if you did that....

  102. Re:Nice! Now along with commies we'll be HACKERS by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 1

    This is michael we're talking about. You're aware of his cybersquatting on censorware.org, aren't you? Seriously.

    --
    "Sufferin' succotash."
  103. SCOX = BRE-X ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Following is an opinion - all Speculation & conjecture - could SCOX = BRE-X?

    BRE-X was a struggling small town Canadian mining company.

    SCOX is a struggling small town Utah software company.

    Midland Walsh, one of the principals of BRE-X was famous for suing a former employer and getting a settlement for an undisclosed sum.

    Darl McBride, one of the principals of SCOX is famous for suing a former employer and getting a settlement for an undisclosed sum.

    BRE-X suddenly said they found these incredibly huge gold deposits in a mine in Indonesia. This despite considerable prior evidence that this mine never contained gold before.

    SCOX suddenly says they found these incredibly huge illegal UNIX code deposits in Linux. This despite considerable prior evidence that Linux never contained illegal UNIX before.

    BRE-X brought in well-known outside experts (Kavanagh and Francisco) which made their claims of gold found, look more credible. Investors didn't know if these outside experts were directly involved in the search for gold - it later turned out that they weren't.

    SCOX brought in well-known outside experts (Boies and Heise) which made their claims of gold found, look more credible. Investors don't know if these outside experts were directly involved in the search for UNIX code - how will it later turn out?

    BRE-X said they had their own secret teams of experts, whose identities they couldn't reveal, supporting their claims (assaying of core samples for gold).

    SCOX says they have their own secret teams of experts,whose identities they couldn't reveal, supporting their claims (finding illegal UNIX code in Linux).

    Industry experts criticized the BRE-X techniques for assaying which were unorthodox, which they say didn't follow industry standard practises, and lacked concrete details.

    Industry experts criticized the SCOX techniques for code search which were unorthodox, which they say don't follow industry standard practises, and lack concrete details.

    BRE-X's reports (with incredible claims) were criticized by industry experts for the same reasons. The industry experts were ignored.

    SCOX reports (with incredible claims) are criticized by industry experts for the same reasons. The industry experts are ignored.

    BRE-X kept issuing new reports, with no verifiable concrete details, upping and upping their claims of gold found.

    SCOX keep issuing new reports, with no verifiable concrete details, upping and upping their claims of UNIX code found.

    Despite the obvious reasons to doubt, media and stock analysts preferred the BRE-X version of events to that of the industry experts. Some stock analysts (Bianchini of Nesbitt Burns) really pushed the stock hard.

    Despite the obvious reasons to doubt, media and stock analysts preferred the SCOX version of events to that of the industry experts. Some stock analysts (Cohen of JHC Capital Management) really pushed the stock hard.

    As more and more discrepencies in the BRE-X story came to light, the company produced a series of increasingly unsatisfactory explanations, and more outrageous claims, which were disputed by industry experts too.

    As more and more discrepencies in the SCOX story come to light, the company produced a series of increasingly unsatisfactory explanations, and more outrageous claims, which were disputed by industry experts too.

    The BRE-X stock prise rose and rose on the Toronto Stock Exchange, driven by massive relatively uncritical media coverage.

    The SCOX stock prise rose and rose on the NASDAQ, driven by massive relatively uncritical media coverage.

    BRE-X insiders cashed out millions of stock. It was a tiny fraction of the total company stock, but still a lot of money to them, especially considering their prior investment in the company was worth a relative pittance.

    SCOX insiders cash out millions of stock. It was a tiny fraction

  104. Re:sco.txt - Security by coldnight · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well, given that they are quoting code from 1979 and earlier as infringing, how many good techs do you think still work there?

    I wonder how many people are removing thier time at SCO from thier employment history at this moment?

  105. Huh? by eniu!uine · · Score: 1

    Now that I've seen those words, my time at Slashdot is done. I can move on. They're working for SCO! You're just too goddamn stupid to admit that you're digging your own grave.

    This Comment was generated with the Comment-O-Matic for SCO Stories.

  106. there's an interview on wired aswell by naph · · Score: 3, Interesting
    wired interview with darl mcbride

    my fav quote: "The world is moving to a Unix operating environment, and SCO owns the intellectual property rights to it"

    SCO to rule the world then? heh!

    --
    "if i'd known it was harmless, i'd have killed it myself"
    1. Re:there's an interview on wired aswell by pimpinmonk · · Score: 1
      "The world is moving to a Unix operating environment, and SCO owns the intellectual property rights to it"
      Isn't that an ironic sentence? Didn't the world move *from* a unix operating environment 15 years ago? God bless those that stuck through :-)
  107. It means "fire up John the Ripper"... by leonbrooks · · Score: 1

    ...on that shiny new HP cluster, supplied by a Canopy Group lackey. (-:

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  108. That can't be right! by leonbrooks · · Score: 1
    Mormons [...] are christians, which means the Ten Commandments apply.

    Yeah? Go read Exodus 20:8-11 and tell me why none of them obey it. Dollars to doughnuts some odd corner of BoM or PoGP claims to supercede it.

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
    1. Re:That can't be right! by Malcontent · · Score: 1

      Don't you know?

      You are free to completely ignore any part of the bible you don't like.

      I am sure God says that someplace in the bible maybe right after he says to kill the homosexuals.

      --

      War is necrophilia.

    2. Re:That can't be right! by shaldannon · · Score: 1

      Hmm. Well, I do, and my family does, and lots of others of us do, so maybe you should revise your assesment that no Mormons keep the sabbath day holy.

      --


      What is your Slash Rating?
    3. Re:That can't be right! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do realize that the sabbath day is Saturday and not Sunday right? It was changed by papal decree to Sunday to coincide with a Roman pagan holiday.

      So do any Mormons celebrate the TRUE sabbath?

  109. Round of applause, that man! by leonbrooks · · Score: 1
    Soviet Russia never resembled anything from Marx's communist ideal and to date, no "communist" country in the world has. Marx, like all political theorists was a dreamer who ignored the one wildcard i.e. human nature.

    The converse is also true: almost any political system will work (including dictatorships and anarchies) if you postulate 100% altruistic and sane participants.

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  110. Possible explanation of SCOX price by walterbyrd · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Ripped from Yahoo's RHAT message board:
    ===
    Possible explanation of SCOX price
    by: heimdal31 08/29/03 04:34 pm
    Msg: 98717 of 98729

    I've tried to put some of the information I've gleaned from the SCO board into more easily digestible form.

    I think the most interesting one is

    http://www.threenorth.com/sco/cohen.html

    but all 4 are linked from

    http://www.threenorth.com/sco

  111. ARGH!!!!! (warning, rant) by Balinares · · Score: 1

    I'm SO tired of that load of low-IQ FUD. Let's drop that bullshit already, goddamn it. (I mean the parent posts here, not you, eniu!uine).

    Canopy has absolutely *NO* control over Trolltech, much less KDE. They don't own more than 5% of Trolltech. Do you know how much decision power 5% gives them? Zero. None. Zilch. Got it? Going against them will absolutely not hurt SCO. Only Linux. Want to hurt SCO? Keep using Linux and whatever your fav desktop environment is. That's *it*.

    Just let the bitter anti-KDE trolls swoop as low and underhanded as they'll want, and let the rest of us move on and actually work on improving software, alright?

    The only thing that this bullshit (sorry for the language again, but I absolutely LOATHE liars and hypocrites) would achieve is 1) make the people who haven't managed to beat Trolltech on technical value gloat, and 2) push the Linux desktop development back a year or two. I am absolutely appalled that some /.ers would resort to such underhanded tactics. If at *least* it had any chance to hurt SCO, I'd understand, but it's not even the case!

    Damn it, as if the industry's state wasn't embittering enough as it is, do we *really* need such backhanded moves among our ranks?

    (And yes, I know, at least a few of the parent posters believed in all honesty that this would somehow hurt SCO, but -- come on, people... Shooting yourself in the foot hurts the foot, not the podiatrist...)

    --

    -- B.
    This sig does in fact not have the property it claims not to have.
    1. Re:ARGH!!!!! (warning, rant) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Canopy has absolutely *NO* control over Trolltech, much less KDE. They don't own more than 5% of Trolltech.

      How does that compare to the other companies on the list? If you actually sounded like you were at pains to avoid harm coming to any company not-too-closely linked with the Canopy Group then I might have some sympathy with you. As it is, this special pleading is pathetic.

      How much shareholding does it take to be a legitimate target? 5%? 10%? 25%? 50%? Any amount as long as it's more than Trolltech because the pretense that it's percentage shareholding that's got you worked up is a shallow lie? How much?

    2. Re:ARGH!!!!! (warning, rant) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Canopy has absolutely *NO* control over Trolltech, much less KDE. They don't own more than 5% of Trolltech.

      Firstly, I think you're "forgetting" to include the shareholding that SCO Group holds directly in Trolltech. Including that they are over 5%, though not by much.

      Secondly, quit pretending this is about KDE. KDE is not the same as Trolltech. Criticising Trolltech is not the same as criticising KDE. KDE is a legitimate Free Software product. Trolltech is a company part owned by Canopy, part ownder directly by SCO and who have made NO efforts to distance themselves from Canopy or from SCO. A simple press release condemning SCO's actions would go a long way.

  112. Another letter to the AG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd like to see a letter that I could send to my state attorney general (and/or US attorney general), asking him to consider investgating SCO for possible extortion.

    I'd like to see this issue tackled from the executive branch as well as the legislative branch.

  113. The rest of the world outside of of /. by no+reason+to+be+here · · Score: 1

    thinks a cracker is either:
    A) a kind of baked good;
    or
    B) a white boy.

    The rest of the world thinks "hacker = guy who breaks into computers and stuff". this is how the language has evolved. deal with it. you can't force people to change something like this (even though it hasn't stopped people from trying, a la "couriel" or "thru").

  114. Yeah it's off-topic by mpeg4codec · · Score: 1

    Most daemons these days don't have to run as root just to lookup passwords because of PAM. On the other hand, you could consider modifying PAM.

  115. Nope... by Chordonblue · · Score: 1

    The problem is we're continually keeping SCO in the press all by ourselves. We don't even need Darl(ing's) encouragement anymore. All they have to do is sit back and laugh. Remember, this is a company who, six months ago was getting no press at all.

    My prediction is, when the smoke clears, SCO's employees, users, and vendors will be screwed but their execs will be sailing off the gold coast. There's really nothing that can be done about it I suppose. :(

    --
    "...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
  116. SCO's Password by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    According to this program, the password from
    root:6X7liA1zmJhyA:12255:0:10000::::
    is "Cracking".

  117. Hostile takeover of SCO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    How much would a hostile takeover of SCO cost?

    Could we organize a distributed effort to buy all the SCO stock and do just that?

    1. Re:Hostile takeover of SCO by foonf · · Score: 2, Informative

      How much would a hostile takeover of SCO cost?

      It would be impossible. As has been repeatedly detailed here, they are 95% privately held. The shares you would need to buy to take them over simply aren't available on the market.

      --

      "(Man) tries to live his own life as if he were telling a story. But you have to choose: live or tell." --Sartre
  118. You're full of it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The GPL doesn't "remove" any right. You *never had* the right to distribute derivative works. It GRANTS you a right to re-distribute under certain terms.


    The GPL removes the owner's ability to control the distribution, and grants that right to anyone who wants it. I will never do that with MY software code.

  119. Suing customers NOT distributors? by crovira · · Score: 1

    If you buy something (a book or a magazine,) in good faith, you're not liable to be sued for infringement. The distributors are liable. And Caldera is a Distributor.

    Suing the customers would victimize them TWICE.

    SCO is trying to do the impossible and switching stories fast enoung in the hopes that nobody notices that they have the bull by the end incapable of facial expression instead of by the horns.

    To continue with the metaphor, they're going to get gored like a slow runner dressed in Red at Pamplona.

    --
    MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
  120. Options/insider information... by linuxjack55 · · Score: 1

    ...can be found here.

    So far, I've just parsed McBride's SEC filings, but the rest of the SCO crew -- Broughton, Bench, Olson, Wilson, Hunsaker, and Opinder -- will be joining him on the page shortly.

    One thing protracted litigation -- and can there be any other kind with Boies on one side and IBM on the other? -- does for McBride is keep the market buzz around SCOX going. Each additional month of FUD puts another 8,333 price-inflated shares in his pocket. That number jumps to 12,500 a month in April of 2004. The FUD also gives his executive staff an opportunity to dump options that were essentially worthless a year before. Reginald Broughton, for example, has moved $670,000 (55,000 shares) of SCOX since June 20th.

    Almost all of the insider trades this year have been made pursuant to 10b5-1 plans, which purport to insulate insiders from liability by disposing of stock according to a fixed, predetermined schedule. My guess -- and that's all it is -- is that these plans were put in place recently, in anticipation of exactly what has transpired. It doesn't take an MBA to figure out that SCO's current course of action would generate an increase in the price of SCOX. For whatever reason, investors seem to respond to the sizzle first, and check to see if it's steak later. If that's the case, SCO's executives are gaming the system, and doing a pretty good job of it.

    All in all, the whole mess reeks of stock manipulation, but, given the current regulatory climate (whatever happened to Kenny Lay?), the relatively small amounts of money involved, and the steps the principals have taken to protect themselves, I doubt if there's much the SEC can or will do about it.

    --
    The trouble with practical jokes is that very often they get elected. -- Will Rogers
  121. CORRECT translation by Knunov · · Score: 1

    My translation was even worse than I thought :)

    OK, from the mouths of 3 native Czechs, this is the closest to an exact translation as it gets:

    jestli ano,

    urcite se budou lepe venovat svym serverum.. a nejen tomu nasledujicimu :-)


    if yes,

    they will definitely pay more attention to their servers.. and not only to the following one :-)


    Knunov

    --
    Why do users with IDs under 100,000 or over 700,000 usually have the most worthwhile comments?
  122. Re:business vs tech press by MasonMcD · · Score: 1

    I'm too lazy, but can someone post a link to how much SCO stock is shorted right now? And maybe how much those put contracts cost?

    And maybe as a funny little comparison, see how much call contracts are going for.

  123. SCO would make more from licensing Linux by SHEENmaster · · Score: 1

    They sure as hell don't make $599 per Solaris license or per *BSD license. If a fleet of space penguins came to Earth and took every copy of Linux with them when they left, a more likely scenario than SCO winning, then I would recommend a switch to Solaris or FreeBSD over OpenServer, which I knew sucked before this whole fiasco.

    If they did succeed in driving businesses from Linux, they couldn't hope to drive them to SCO. This way they at least get the $1 for a Microsoft Blanket License for use in MS-LINUX

    --
    You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
  124. One issue to raise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I amazed crafty Darl would miss this obvious profit opportunity!
    Q: Why are SCO suing everyone? A: SCO is run by a bunch of vicious, lying, cowardly, greedy, sociopathic lawyers.

    Looks like Dennis' check from IBM finally cleared. I pictured an IBM semi-trailer rumbling down the highway, with an SCO chicken (looked like Darl with feathers) standing at the other end of a straight, squaking furiously at the oncoming behemoth. The chicken doesn't stand a chance. Actually that doesn't sound any more nonsensical than their current machinations.

    great ap mod parent up

  125. Mod the parent up!!! Excellent Groklaw link!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks for pointing out that item. Groklaw has performed quite a feat of research and analysis this time.

  126. So what's the status of the countersuits? by Animats · · Score: 1
    So what's the status of the countersuits? Red Hat is sueing, but there hasn't been much news about the suit. Anyone else? There's the German injunction; SCO can't make claims in Germany any more, unless and until they go to court and back them up, which they've declined to do.

    SCO is vulnerable to suits for defamation, tortious interference with contract, and false advertising, as a minimum. Extortion would be a stretch.

  127. re: ARGH!!! (warning, rant) by dtrent · · Score: 2, Informative

    I'm SO tired of that load of low-IQ FUD. Let's drop that bullshit already, goddamn it....

    [rest of rant cut]

    So yeah, there's probably some Gnome people getting a chuckle out of all this, so what. This is bigger than Gnome vs KDE. The point isn't to punish Trolltech, it is to put pressure on them so that they, in turn, complain to Canopy. This applies to all Canopy group companies. If Canopy hears enough of it, they just might get the message

    That KDE has a better desktop than Gnome is completely irrelevant. I like KDE, I don't like Gnome. I've switched to using IceWM for the time being, and sent KDE/Trolltech letters telling them why. According to you that makes me a "low-IQ, lying hypocrite"? Oh *you* come on.

  128. Yes I am in fact a shameless karma whore by MichaelCrawford · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I am happy to report that the last time I posted a link to my following article on Slashdot, the article received 1200 referrals from my comment:

    Also, in the day and a half since posting the link a Google search for "Let's Put SCO Behind Bars" went from 2190 to 3250 matches.

    The article is under a Creative Commons license. Please copy it to your website, your weblog, or other message boards. The markup is very simple and the page completely self-contained to enable easier copying.

    There is a UBB code version for message boards that use that format. When I get some time I'll make a plain-text one suitable for email and usenet news.

    Thank you for your help.

    --
    Request your free CD of my piano music.
  129. SCO Group to Shoot Babies by daniel_yokomiso · · Score: 2, Funny

    See the news here.

    --
    Disclaimer: If I disagree with you I'm probably trolling...
  130. Now you're backpedaling ... by mec · · Score: 1

    There is nothing in current or past SEC filings which suggests MS or Sun are supporting SCO.
    There's no suggestion in the filings that either of those companies is paying SCO anything on an on-going basis.

    ... and it still doesn't work. You're full of shit. I busted your first post wide open with a direct link to sec.gov. Now I'm gonna bust your second post, too -- same 10-Q, same page.

    "The two licensing agreements signed by us to date resulted in revenue of $8,250,000 during the April 30, 2003 quarter and provide for an aggregate of an additional $5,000,000 to be paid to us over the next three quarters."

    Extra credit, since you can't read a 10-Q even after the link is shoved in your face:

    "These contracts do not provide for any payments beyond 2003, except that Microsoft was granted the option to acquire expanded licensing rights, at its election, that would result in additional payments to us if exercised."

  131. Re:For what it'w worth... by mec · · Score: 2, Funny

    Still under a DDOS :P

    The Slashdotting will continue until the DDOS improves. :)

  132. Pronunciation? by phritz · · Score: 1

    The Economist story claims that SCO is pronounces "skoe" - is this true? I've been pronouncing it "ess-see-ohh" ...

  133. SCO's taint? by tommck · · Score: 1
    Time to clear out the bin of the taint of SCO

    Hey... I don't know about you, pal, but I don't want to know anything about SCO's taint...

    --
    ---- It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again. It does this whenever it's told.
  134. Worlds first non-automated DDOS? by snakelass · · Score: 1

    Could it be said that this is the worlds first non-automated DDOS attack? :)

    --
    It is impossible for a man to learn what he thinks he already knows. - Epictetus
  135. Sleep with the fishes! by macdaddy357 · · Score: 1

    Why don't IBM, and anyone else he has sued just make Darl McBride sleep with the fishes? How about a re-enactment of the St. Valentine's Day Massacre on SCO's whole executive and legal staff? Business just isn't done like it was in the 1920s any more.

    --
    How ya like dat?
  136. The BBC Seem to be missing the point by gnalre · · Score: 1

    The BBC posted this comment on the SCO issue

    Linux community told to 'get real'


    It seems to pretty well miss the point(apart from being inaccurate,apprently SCO never had a linux distribution, doh!).

    I've sent my comments to the author. I would suggest others do the same

    --
    Choose your allies carefully, it is highly unlikely you will be held accountable for the actions of your enemies
  137. Re:sco.txt fake ? by H310iSe · · Score: 1

    Speaking of lawyers, now that the SCO execs dumped stock already, the lawyers are the only ones left making money on this miserable situation. For example, SCO's main law firm and especially their Partner-In-Bed (is that an official term?) w/ SCO, Mark Heise in the Miami office.

    --
    closed minded is as closed minded does
  138. Captured not so well. by phriedom · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I can't agree that The Economist captured the issue all that well. I am glad that they were clear that SCO refuses to detail the violations because then Linux would quickly be rewritten around it because Linux people WANT to fix it. However, I found the heavy editorializing, like calling Mr. Perens an evangelist, to be clouding the issue.

    I was also disappointed by this:"Roughly as apes and humans allegedly have common ancestors, several operating systems can trace their lineage to UNIX, including Linux."

    That is just plain incorrect, isn't it? Linux was written cleanly, it doesn't have any parents, right? More like it sprung whole from Mr. Torvold's head, like Athena out of Zeus, if one has to have an analogy. It is a workalike to Unix, but that is a different thing.

    I'm glad the economist at least covered the fact that SCO distributes Linux and in being sued for copyright violation on that account, but I still hope that the mainstream press will get it right, and not resort to generalizations or incorrect simplifications.

    --
    Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
    1. Re:Captured not so well. by heironymouscoward · · Score: 1

      Linux is much more than Linus's kernel, and most of the core of Linux is built to Unix specifications in one way or another. Calling Unix the ancestor of Linux is entirely accurate in the same way as the horse cart is the ancestor of the car. I'm sure they don't share code, but we agree that there is a joining history.
      Linux is most certainly a descendant of Unix, and calling it a "workalike" is unnecessarily pedantic. Are your modern sportshoes "workalikes" for sandals, or descendants of sandals?
      The Economist is simply using language the way most people use it, unaware perhaps of the color with which we, who see the generations much more closely, paint words like "ancestor". The good news is that - as I said - this is the kind of article you can show to non-technical business people and they will understand.
      And yes, Mr Perens is an evangelist, and I think he would agree with that label. It simply means someone who "spreads the word".

      --
      Ceci n'est pas une signature
    2. Re:Captured not so well. by phriedom · · Score: 1

      "...but we agree that there is a joining history."

      I didn't agree to any such thing. And furthermore, I think we disagree on what it means to be a decendant. I would probably let it go in a casual converstation, but in this case the central issue is "what is a derivative work?" and decendant implies derivitive to me. So yes, in this context I would call sportshoes "workalikes" to earlier sandals, because the only thing they have in common is their use to protect the feet. And in this context I wouldn't call a car a decendant of a horse and buggy either.

      I don't think it is pedantic at all to belabor this issue, because I think it goes to the heart of what SCO is trying to argue. If you just tell the non-technical business people that Linux is a free decendant of Unix, then they might believe it when SCO says that they "own" the trunk of the tree, which they say is System V, and therefore all of the branches, including Linux, belong to them. If you stipulate that Linux is a cleanly separate group of things designed to be a free alternative to Unix, then SCO's claims of owning Linux because they bought some rights to an old Unix are going to be met with more scepticism.

      Is calling Linux a Unix workalike really all that confusing?

      --
      Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
  139. Hey Squawk Box, what gives! by lordkimbot · · Score: 1

    Had to dash a note off to the guys on Squawk Box on CNBC, a favorite of mine in the morning. They usually comment on stuff like this. Perhaps they'll give it some air time. They have been seriously anti stock weasel with the Jack Grubman types. Hope I can stir things up a little.

    I seriously think this one got by someone there.

    --
    sig mind freed
  140. About Suse... by p24t · · Score: 1

    Seems like someone forgot to mention... Not only did Suse take this to court already, but they also shut down SCO's actions in Germany. Guess that missed the article

    p24t

  141. Re: ARGH!!! (warning, rant) by Balinares · · Score: 1

    > The point isn't to punish Trolltech, it is to put pressure on them

    Okay. Let's put it that way. Are you a paying customer of Trolltech? Most Linux users (us!) aren't. If we aren't paying customers, how the HELL do you mean to 'put pressure on them'? I mean, seriously? Even worse -- let's assume we email them relentlessly, etc. Good, now we've annoyed them. What does it change from Canopy's side? Absolutely *nothing*. Trolltech has not lost a cent, and that's the only thing that matters to a holding like Canopy. If Canopy was interested in Trolltech at a controlling level, they'd invest for way more than 5%.

    But then, I may perfectly have overlooked something, alright. How do you think the using another toolkit rather than Qt will help us against SCO?

    Note that the whole debate is based on the premise that Trolltech could get away from Canopy at a whim if they wanted to, which is quite a big assumption to make, and goes straight against my experience of how investment works over here in the old world (though once again, YMMV, I guess).

    Oh, to answer other people: yes, I'm making a special case of Trolltech, because of all the companies listed in the earlier post, they're the only one who have been extremely supportive of Linux and have helped and are still helping us making it progress on the desktop. Once again, not matter how firmly you believe you should shoot yourself in the foot, the primary consequence will STILL be a broken foot.

    > That KDE has a better desktop than Gnome is completely irrelevant.

    Agreed, and I wouldn't even say that KDE is better than Gnome. Just that I'd MUCH rather see them compete on technical merits.

    > I've switched to using IceWM for the time being, and sent
    > KDE/Trolltech letters telling them why

    I'd be interested in any answer you got, I must say. That case is a very tough one to make without sounding like, well, someone with a somewhat naive outlook on relationships with investors maybe... I know I sure wouldn't have found the arguments to make it sound any more pertinent than, say, "I'm ostracizing you because I once saw Bad Guy smile at you, and I want him down!" *g*

    > According to you that makes me a "low-IQ, lying hypocrite"?
    > Oh *you* come on.

    Agreed. Those were harsh words. I was way pissed, still am to an extent.

    However, I still cannot see how that will lead to anything but hurting Linux. I have no idea how your IQ compares with the rest of the world, but I can only urge you to concentrate all of it on the issue for a moment -- and especially those two points: 1) Is Trolltech likely to have any kind of say or influence about what Canopy does with other entirely unrelated companies? In the real world, I mean. 2) Once given that hurting Trolltech will do strictly nothing against SCO, why would people bother attacking them?

    It might very well be that people seriously think it is actually possible to get to SCO through Trolltech. But honestly, I think not. Did you notice that the URL linked in the earlier post did NOT suggest to write to Canopy-owned companies about your concerns, for example, but urged to simply replace their products with others? In Trolltech's case, how will replacing a freaking *GPL*ed lib with another even remotely hit Canopy's radar? Does that make any sense to you, frankly?

    Don't let your good feeling and honest willingness to help Linux against SCO (which I acknowledge and respect!) blind you. This is not about hurting SCO. Hurting SCO is the pretext.

    And it's already working. Just look at your reaction and eniu!uine's.

    This is sick.

    --

    -- B.
    This sig does in fact not have the property it claims not to have.
  142. http://action.eff.org -- running Win NT?!?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Noticed the "mail your representatives" page was written in ASP

    AHEM
    talk about freedom...

    1. Re:http://action.eff.org -- running Win NT?!?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wrote them about it, on the "feedback" part of the site. Here is their answer:

      Re: Feedback Form
      Date: Today 4:41:16 pm
      From: Ren Bucholz
      To: "gwidion(at)mpc.com.br"

      Hello,

      Thanks for writing. The action center is actually hosted and largely
      maintained by a third-party vendor called CTSG (http://www.ctsg.com).
      We would love to see CTSG move off of MS products, but they are the
      only vendor we've been able to find that does data management for this
      kind of project. The data that goes into the legislative directory is
      publicly available, but keeping it current despite constant
      redistricting is a huge endeavor. Also, many legislators don't use
      standard email addresses, so CTSG takes care of interfacing our actions
      with various webforms. We fully support open source and free software
      and would welcome any competitors in this space for these services.
      Thanks for your concern and please let me know if you have any other
      questions.

      Best,

      Ren

      On Saturday, August 30, 2003, at 11:38 PM, gwidion(at)mpc.com.br wrote:
      (...)

      __________
      Ren Bucholz
      Activist
      Electronic Frontier Foundation
      454 Shotwell Street
      San Francisco, CA 94110
      p. 415 436.9333 x121
      f. 415 436.9993
      (...)

      --
      Pope Raymond Lama, posting as a coward after modding parent up.

  143. It's small claims court... by shaitand · · Score: 1

    It doesn't matter if someone wins or loses in small claims court, it sets no precedent. It's not like higher courts where it sets a precedent that's as good as law.

  144. "Roundup" is the civilian version of... by leonbrooks · · Score: 1

    ...Agent Orange, which seems strangely appropriate.

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  145. BTW, the stuff there about groundwater...? by leonbrooks · · Score: 1
    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  146. [OT] Do give up on that faux-smartass tagline idea by leonbrooks · · Score: 1
    lilo: linux init=/bin/bash - Instant root without password

    I tried that. My machine said "Password:".

    I guess that's because Mandrake's installer prompted me for a LILO password when I set the machine up, and I bothered to supply one. "Oh, the security of it all!" (-:

    If you want real instant root without password, leave the root password blank when setting up, then tick the box that asks you to confirm that you're criminally negligent, and click on Next. Be sure to set the security level to "Welcome to crackers" (I believe they call it "Low" these days) and select sshd for installation so that this effect can be used remotely.

    If you think that's disturbing, I know of an OS which has no such protections: a QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System) derivative which was in turn a CP/M clone, called Microsoft Windows. "Instant root, all the time" (and unless you're fully patched, "from everywhere").

    Try a tagline that says "This would be a witty tagline but I haven't developed that far yet".

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  147. Fencepost error by leonbrooks · · Score: 1

    Sorry, are you telling me that there are Seventh-day Mormons?

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  148. So you think that money talks... by leonbrooks · · Score: 1

    ...and D'ohl's money is saying, "Wow, what a dedicated, professional Mormon guy this dude is"? (-:

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  149. Time to sue D'ohl, Blake and David instead? by leonbrooks · · Score: 1
    I think ignoring the company and going for the false, misleading and/or manipulative statements from those who drive and/or profit from it would make more political and financial sense.
    1. I am a Linux developer. D'ohl McBride, you publicly accused me of using stolen code. That is a slander. Retract it as publicly as you made it.
    2. Since you have not retracted your slander, here is my lawsuit in the amount of $3,000,000,000.00, being the amount of the gain you intended the slander to support the acquisition of.
    3. Plus interest. Your time starts now.

    Another possible approach: send him an invoice for USD$31,000,000 being royalties for his use of your code during August, available otherwise only under the GPL. Terms 7 days.

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  150. Yeah well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Get a life, asshole. Shooting babies is funny. Obviously some people are stupid enough to license.

    This Comment was generated with the Comment-O-Matic for SCO Stories.

  151. Re: ARGH!!! (warning, rant) by DASHSL0T · · Score: 1

    It isn't about shooting yourself in the foot, it is about not giving your money to people who wish to damage GNU/Linux.

    While Trolltech does not fall into that category (I am sure that not many of the Canopy companies do), the fact is that when they profit, Canopy profits. Canopy uses those profits to launch spurious lawsuits against other companies. That is their business model - IP patent warfare and abuse.

    Trolltech isn't required to obtain financing via Canopy. They are perfectly capable of obtaining financing through other VC firms or other means completely.

    The fact is, would you give money to Canopy directly? Then why would you do so indirectly?

    --
    Freedom Is Universal
    Linux-Universe
  152. Their best evidence by 96804896 · · Score: 1

    We finally got to see what was presumably their best evidence, and it was a steaming turd of donkeyshit.

    We have barely seen any facts yet. Is it wishful thinking or what else makes everyone believe they have nothing better to show in court?

    While many of their allegations sound bizarre and seem to be wrong, I for one am not convinced they're all baseless. Consider SCO is undisputable spreading FUD. Making themselves appear to be a bunch of morons which need not be taken serious could be another tactic.

  153. Re: ARGH!!! (warning, rant) by Balinares · · Score: 1

    > It isn't about shooting yourself in the foot, it is about
    > not giving your money to people who wish to damage GNU/Linux.

    I've understood that already, but thanks for trying to clarify. :)
    My point is that even if you're really trying to aim somewhere else, as long as the bullet goes through your foot, well, you've shot yourself in the foot, and the fact you did it on purpose or not is irrelevant. I *do* know that a broken foot is not your immediate goal, of course.

    > Trolltech isn't required to obtain financing via Canopy.

    This is true. This /was/ true -- only, now, it's too late. It might have been poor judgment at the time, but they did. And you can *NOT* just give the investors their money back and say "Well, bye". Excuse me for asking this, but do you realize that if companies could walk away from their investors on a whim, then they would ALL do so the moment they turn a profit? :) Investment contracts do NOT allow you to do that, because investors base their business on the assumption that most companies won't make it, BUT a few of them will turn a profit large enough to cover the other companies and more. This is why they CAN'T and DON'T let go companies that begin to turn a large profit.

    If you want to achieve anything fruitful wrt/ Trolltech and Canopy, then go after *Canopy*, and have them let Trolltech go. I fear that's all we can do about it. Yes, I know, it sucks. No, I don't like it any more than you do, you know. Trolltech is one of the poster childs of successful open source business models. It's a fucking pity to see them involved in all this shit.

    > The fact is, would you give money to Canopy directly?

    No way. I don't, and I wouldn't.

    > Then why would you do so indirectly?

    I don't, and I wouldn't, *WHICH IS WHY* I'm using the GPL'ed Qt. How does Canopy make any money from people using the GPL'ed Qt? Frankly? Better yet: do you really thing that if a company like Canopy had any say in this, there would be such as thing as a GPL'ed version of Qt? :)

    Maybe you're worried about things such as 'mindshare' and things like that, which is an arguable point, I guess. Or at least, it would probably be if Qt wasn't where it already is. Did you now that in kernel 2.6 the 'make xconfig' system is now Qt-based?

    The Qt cat is out of the proprietary bag for the time being. Neither you nor Canopy can reverse this. Only commercial Trolltech customers can hurt Trolltech financially (and commercial Trolltech customers can't go for GNUstep or GTK, as you suggest, because what commercial Trolltech customers are after is seamless cross-platform portability).

    And even so, they'd hurt us Linux users more than Trolltech themselves, and Canopy 20 times less still (5%, remember).

    It's over, DashSl0t. I'm sorry. I want to hurt SCO every bit as much as you do, but shooting Trolltech is not the way to go. Trolltech IS one of our feet. Even if it unfortunately stepped in a turd at some point in the past.

    --

    -- B.
    This sig does in fact not have the property it claims not to have.
  154. Re:sco.txt fake ? by Larsing · · Score: 1

    I can't remember how many years ago it became standard to use MD5 sums instead

    Could it be that they are using an old derelict OS verion on their server...

    ...like OpenServer or UnixWare? :-)

    --
    Ethics is what you say you do. Morals is what you actually do.
  155. Stupid! by Larsing · · Score: 1

    Infinite Number of Monkeys Write UNIX, Sued by SCO

    You just revealde the most heavily guarded secret of the Linux kernel hacking team!!!

    --
    Ethics is what you say you do. Morals is what you actually do.
  156. Enuff!!! by jo42 · · Score: 1

    Enuff frickin' SCO and Linux!! Install FreeBSD and be done with it for fsck sakes!

    Pooped in nappies Linux geeks...

  157. Re:sco.txt fake ? by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

    DEAR SIR/MADAM:

    I AM MR. DARL MCBRIDE CURRENTLY SERVING AS THE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF THE SCO GROUP, FORMERLY KNOWN AS CALDERA SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL, IN LINDON, UTAH, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. I KNOW THIS LETTER MIGHT SURPRISE YOUR BECAUSE WE HAVE HAD NO PREVIOUS COMMUNICATIONS OR BUSINESS DEALINGS BEFORE NOW.
    MY ASSOCIATES HAVE RECENTLY MADE CLAIM TO COMPUTER SOFTWARES WORTH AN ESTIMATED $1 BILLION U.S. DOLLARS. I AM WRITING TO YOU IN CONFIDENCE BECAUSE WE URGENTLY REQUIRE YOUR ASSISTANCE TO OBTAIN THESE FUNDS. IN THE EARLY 1970S THE AMERICAN TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH CORPORATION DEVELOPED AT GREAT EXPENSE THE COMPUTER OPERATING SYSTEM SOFTWARE KNOWN AS UNIX. UNFORTUNATELY THE LAWS OF MY COUNTRY PROHIBITED THEM FROM SELLING THESE SOFTWARES AND SO THEIR VALUABLE SOURCE CODES REMAINED PRIVATELY HELD. UNDER A SPECIAL ARRANGEMENT SOME PROGRAMMERS FROM THE CALIFORNIA UNIVERSITY OF BERKELEY DID ADD MORE CODES TO THIS OPERATING SYSTEM, INCREASING ITS VALUE, BUT NOT IN ANY WAY TO DILUTE OR DISPARAGE OUR FULL AND RIGHTFUL OWNERSHIP OF THESE CODES, DESPITE ANY AGREEMENT BETWEEN AMERICAN TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH AND THE CALIFORNIA UNIVERSITY OF BERKELEY, WHICH AGREEMENT WE DENY AND DISAVOW. IN THE YEAR 1984 A CHANGE OF REGIME IN MY COUNTRY ALLOWED THE AMERICAN TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH CORPORATION TO MAKE PROFITS FROM THESE SOFTWARES. IN THE YEAR 1990 OWNERSHIP OF THESE SOFTWARES WAS TRANSFERRED TO THE CORPORATION UNIX SYSTEM LABORATORIES. IN THE YEAR 1993 THIS CORPORATION WAS SOLD TO THE CORPORATION NOVELL. IN THE YEAR 1994 SOME EMPLOYEES OF NOVELL FORMED THE CORPORATION CALDERA SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL, WHICH BEGAN TO DISTRIBUTE AN UPSTART OPERATING SYSTEM KNOWN AS LINUX. IN THE YEAR 1995 NOVELL SOLD THE UNIX SOFTWARE CODES TO SCO. IN THE YEAR 2001 OCCURRED A SEPARATION OF SCO, AND THE SCO BRAND NAME AND UNIX CODES WERE ACQUIRED BY THE CALDERA SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL, AND IN THE FOLLOWING YEAR THE CALDERA SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL WAS RENAMED SCO GROUP, OF WHICH I CURRENTLY SERVE AS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER.

    MY ASSOCIATES AND I OF THE SCO GROUP ARE THEREFORE THE FULL AND RIGHTFUL OWNERS OF THE OPERATING SYSTEM SOFTWARES KNOWN AS UNIX. OUR ENGINEERS HAVE DISCOVERED THAT NO FEWER THAN SEVENTY (70) LINES OF OUR VALUABLE AND PROPRIETARY SOURCE CODES HAVE APPEARED IN THE UPSTART OPERATING SYSTEM LINUX. AS YOU CAN PLAINLY SEE, THIS GIVES US A CLAIM ON THE MILLIONS OF LINES OF VALUABLE SOFTWARE CODES WHICH COMPRISE THIS LINUX AND WHICH HAS BEEN SOLD AT GREAT PROFIT TO VERY MANY BUSINESS ENTERPRISES. OUR LEGAL EXPERTS HAVE ADVISED US THAT OUR CONTRIBUTION TO THESE CODES IS WORTH AN ESTIMATED ONE (1) BILLION U.S. DOLLARS.

    UNFORTUNATELY WE ARE HAVING DIFFICULTY EXTRACTING OUR FUNDS FROM THESE COMPUTER SOFTWARES. TO THIS EFFECT I HAVE BEEN GIVEN THE MANDATE BY MY COLLEAGUES TO CONTACT YOU AND ASK FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE. WE ARE PREPARED TO SELL YOU A SHARE IN THIS ENTERPRISE, WHICH WILL SOON BE VERY PROFITABLE, THAT WILL GRANT YOU THE RIGHTS TO USE THESE VALUABLE SOFTWARES IN YOUR BUSINESS ENTERPRISE. UNFORTUNATELY WE ARE NOT ABLE AT THIS TIME TO SET A PRICE ON THESE RIGHTS. THEREFORE IT IS OUR RESPECTFUL SUGGESTION, THAT YOU MAY BE IMMEDIATELY A PARTY TO THIS ENTERPRISE, BEFORE OTHERS ACCEPT THESE LUCRATIVE TERMS, THAT YOU SEND US THE NUMBER OF A BANKING ACCOUNT WHERE WE CAN WITHDRAW FUNDS OF A SUITABLE AMOUNT TO GUARANTEE YOUR PARTICIPATION IN THIS ENTERPRISE. AS AN ALTERNATIVE YOU MAY SEND US THE NUMBER AND EXPIRATION DATE OF YOUR MAJOR CREDIT CARD, OR YOU MAY SEND TO US A SIGNED CHECK FROM YOUR BANKING ACCOUNT PAYABLE TO "SCO GROUP" AND WITH THE AMOUNT LEFT BLANK FOR US TO CONVENIENTLY SUPPLY.

    KINDLY TREAT THIS REQUEST AS VERY IMPORTANT AND STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL. I HONESTLY ASSURE YOU THAT THIS TRANSACTION IS 100% LEGAL AND RISK-FREE.