SCO Fined in Munich For Linux Claims

nordi writes "heise.de reports (in German) that SCO Germany has to pay a fine of 10,000 Euros (~10,800 US$) because they kept on saying that Linux contains stolen intellectual property of SCO. In May a German court had decided that SCO Germany must not continue making those claims." Yes, it's auf Deutsch, so break out babelfish.

Comments

We can only hope

[mao che minh]

$10,800 USD seems a bit low, considering that SCOs lies and threats have probably damaged Linux companies and consultants many times that amount. While the US legal system appears impotent in the face of this slandering and despicable business tactic, Germany is obviously prepared for this nonsense. Since the effects of SCOs claims have the potential of effecting companies in just about every nation on Earth, I say that Germany fine them appropriately, and even get the European Union in on the action.

At the end of the day, companies like Microsoft and SCO won't be stopped by the US. The best we can do is waste a couple hundred million in tax dollars on a useless court case that is headed by a puppet judge. We can only hope that the EU will save us, a body that acts swiftly against vil business tactics, and usually solidly (just look at how they dealt with Nintendo).

Re:We can only hope

[Richardsonke1]

It's more important that they have seen that they are lying. I wouldn't care if they fined them $1, as long as it has been taken to court and they have shown that their claims are baseless. That damage is in the past, stop it from happening anymore in the future.

Re:We can only hope

[Zeinfeld]

At the end of the day, companies like Microsoft and SCO won't be stopped by the US. The best we can do is waste a couple hundred million in tax dollars on a useless court case that is headed by a puppet judge.

Jackson a puppet of Microsoft? What are you on? Can I get some?

Jackson was the best thing that happened to Microsoft, Boies was the next best, but not by intention. Jackson was so gratuitously biased that there was no way the appeals court could possibly have backed his decision.

Having watched David Boies in action in the Microsoft, Florida and Napster cases I am convinced that his reputation is vastly over-rated. He was responsible for botching the Microsoft case, he fought the case on the weakest complaints, not the strongest ones. In Florida he let the Bushies roll right over him. His arguments in Napster were profoundly unconvincing.

Re:We can only hope

[arivanov]

This also allows any international company to politely ask SCO to send the licensing request to their German IT department. Or move the IT department mailing address to Germany for the same reason.

So any "licensing" request can be directly forwarded to court and converted to a payment request.

Re:We can only hope

[tomhudson]

Okay, lets look at this in more detail.

1. There was a request for a preliminary injunction agains SCO in reference to claims SCO had made that were contested;
2. They (SCO) were given the opportunity during the hearing for the preliminary injunction to show cause as to why an injunction should not be issued;
3. More specifically, they had the opportunity to show that there was at least SOME factual basis to their claims (they were not obliged to present complete proof at this point, as it was just a prelim, just sufficient proof to allay a preliminary injunction) ;
4. They declined to show ANY proof that there was any basis in fact for their claims;
5. The court, upon failing to see any evidence that there was any legitimacy to SCOs claims: granted the preliminary injunction

Remember that the level of proof required to avoid a preliminary injunction is low, and that SCO failed even that. SCO could have presented proof, requesting that it be sealed by court order, but they didn't. Why? The most reasonable assumption is that they are lying, that the proof doesn't exist, and that admitting to this would end their pump-and-dump scam.

Look at the opposite case: if they HAD presented proof and the preliminary injunction had been defeated, Darl could have had a third volumn of press clippings to dump onstage boasting of his "relevance". Do you think such a press-hungry monkey wouldn't have jumped at the opportunity? In other words, they have been caught in a series of lies, and it's all starting to unravel. Any other interpretation is contrary to the evidence at hand :-)

Re:We can only hope

[Rogerborg]

>It seems utterly natural to me that Jackson would come out of the case with a severe distaste for [Microsoft]

And if he'd just had the simple bloody common sense to keep his comments to himself until after the case, that would have been fine. The problem was that he gave interviews during the case, in which he made his feelings clear. He quite literally pre-judged Microsoft. He was trolled, and he bit.

Not the amount

[TuataraShoes]

It's not the amount of the fine that's important. (Who gets the money anyway.) It's the 'official' trashing of SCO's accusations which is important. It will restore confidence in business considering Linux systems.

Various national courts

[TWX]

For whatever reason, it looks like Courts of Law in other countries seem to operate with more sanity than American courts do. I've wondered if this is in response to a feeling of a lack of due process when the U.S. was founded, or if we just have gotten to where anyone feels that they're entitled to sue "just because".

Of course, SCO/Caldera being an American company trying to enforce claims in a foreign country that doesn't (yet) have software patents might be partially why.

Re:Overzealous regulators; let the market decide

[bit01]

Get real. The free market is a myth. Every market has rules to stop negative behaviour (eg. lying about competitors products, engaging in monopolistic behaviour, running a protection racket) while allowing positive behaviour (eg. improving product, lowering prices).

Re:greedy yanks

[peterprior]

This is becoming more and more clear..

Europe are prepared to take a stand, and the US just sit back and let people / corporations make all the claims and have all the power they want.

This seems to be evident in the Microsoft Antitrust stuff, the Software Patents Issue and now the SCO case.

Glad I live in europe.

Re:pcmag gives undeserved credibility to SCO

[WCMI92]

PC Magazine is part of Ziff-Davis. And I trust anything they editorialize about as far as I could throw a tank.

ZD is notoriously biased towards advertisers. Microsoft being one of their largest ones.

I was a subscriber to Computer Gaming World for years (it used to be by far the BEST gaming magazine) until ZD took over and they started giving glowing reviews to shit games (who advertised).

The old CGW would rip what deserved ripping.

Not about lying but about proof.

[GerardM]

SCO has been fined for saying things without proof/ Where SCO to say the same things and substantiating their claim, it would be ok for them to say so.

A hell of a difference.

Re:German FUD-suppression system superior to USA's

[zpok]

"But on the other hand, Germany embraces its own collection of stupid ideas, like the cradle-to-grave welfare state"

A cradle-to-grave welfare state is a beautiful thing. You're young, healthy and I presume able to have a decent insurance (or you haven't had the pleasure to fall through one of their loopholes yet), but you'll change your tone once you're no longer deemed "productive"...

I currently live in a country with US alike healthcare system, trying to undo some of the 1980's US foreign policy (El Salvador, look it up and weep) and we can't even get our housekeeper and her husband insured. They don't count, the (company-paid) doctors laugh at us. The most we've been able to do is insure her against accidents.

I'll be very glad to move back to Europe next year. Paying my taxes in full, knowing that I'll get it back somehow in education for my daughter, healthcare for my family, a gun-free environment and protection against poverty if we fall from grace.

I just can't believe most Americans think welfare is "liberal"... You just wait and see what happens when something unforseen happens. You'll wish your country (that is presumably you and others who vote) cared a bit more for people in general instead of success stories.

Retarded

[Quintin Stone]

Some of the evidence Sontag showed us is straightforward: Sections of the Linux kernel code relating to the journaling file system and multiprocessor support are identical to the Unix System V code. He offered to show us specific sections of the Unix code, but only under a nondisclosure agreement, which we refused.

This is just plain stupid. How can the author write with a straight face two contradictory sentences, one right after the other? Either you saw the Unix code and compared it to the Linux code, or you did not. If you didn't see the Unix code, how can you sit there and say that it's identical to the Linux code?