Slashdot Mirror
SCO Invoices For Unix Licenses Get Closer
beggs writes "BusinessWeek, InfoWorld and the EE Times Online all have stories about SCO's plans to send out license invoices to Linux vendors for 'Unix license fees for Linux.' The experts advice: Wait and see what happens with the court cases before you pay." RowLowy points to ZDnet's story, which says that "SCO will pursue commercial Linux users who have discussed their Linux work publicly ... However, it won't take action until it's done more research on those businesses." JayR writes to say that Michael Dell recently told a gathering of Dell investors that Dell Computer will offer no protection from SCO lawsuits to customers who buy Linux-based systems from Dell. Keep score: an anonymous reader points out that SCO executives are still selling off their stock. Total proceeds in August of over $600,000. Senior Vice President Reginald Broughton tops the list with over $300,000."
It looks like no one can leave a good thing alone for long. Do any of the majors actually want Linux to win?
The Slant
"and if my accountant is watching please STOP PAYMENT on this check"
Dell will offer no protection? Well I guess that just sounded the death knell for their Linux based offerings.
Who would buy a system with this issue hanging over their head? Computers are uncertain enough as it is!
Yay! Another SCO story. I was going into withdrawal here.
That said, is there anyone left out there who doesn't think that SCO executives were all along trying to pull a pump-n-dump of their own stock?
Isn't this somewhat like extortion?
I mean demanding money for things that you had no input in? It's like me asking everyone who uses Windows to pay me because I think Ms stole my code. Hmm I think I'd have more reason than SCO actually..I did sent Ms some beta bug reports...
In Soviet Russia, the television watches YOU!
In Germany, SCO got fined $10,800 for one offense. If they send multiple extortion letters, they will be fined for each letter. Or alternately, I hope the US courts wake up and follow the lead of the German courts.
So will they relax a bit and stop hounding us when the last executive has sold his last share ?
lots of companies don't pay invoices unless they quote a purchase order number which matches the invoiced amount to within 5%
That's just crazy! Does Darl know you've found his stash? The article didn't mention if you received a license for one cpu along with the immunity from the standard baby killing. I've often heard of companies having a crack legal team, but this is the first time that I've heard of one being on crack.
Please mod me down, I'm a redundant, trolling, flamebait-loving dogmatist and I was a pro-DMCA lobbyist.
This Comment was generated with the Comment-O-Matic for SCO Stories.
We already know that... but did you know that this SOB is a regular church goer?
Of course, he is a Mormon. That should explain it.
This is what kills me - he claims that the SMP code is stolen from Unix. So why would anyone with a single-proc machine pay? Even if he is right?
To the same list as SCO's list, I mean? They'd be every bit as valid as SCO's invoices, and might call a little attention to the absurdity of SCO's claims.
now when you all recieve your invoices, its time to make a class action lawsuit claiming damages!
:V
also put this under caldera news so i can block stupid SCO articles
Corporation have WAY too much control over the legal process and society. They're wielding their greed-drunk power without any thought for anything except their profit.
Remember "No Face" from Spirited Away? Think about it. Better to keep them out of the bath house.
- Hail to our fearless misleader! Fool speed ahead!
Sure, we won't sue linux companies. We are going to go straight to billing them!
So I guess they weren't lying!
Viv
Gmail invites for ip
Dose anyone know that? (And SCO is up to 15.somthing...)
I'm starting to feel stupid for shorting it.
its sure to drop pretty soon.
New year Resolution: Don't change sig this year
So.....this means that SCO is (hypothetically) going to send me an invoice for $699 for each Linux box I'm running, having offered no actual proof that they own any of the code therein.
Cheeky bastards. I could just as reasonably send my clients an invoice for the use of the proprietary PHP code on my web page.
Don't Panic!
Coffee, Hex 7, Real News, and the Daily SCO News. What would my life be like without a routine?
...make great toilet paper.
Although they may not flush well after use - better to send them back from whence they came, once you got your use out of it.
Please use a plastic-lined envelope - no need to punish the poor mail carrier for SCO's stupidity.
DG
Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
before you flame me - hear me out. i was just talking to my workmate, and he exclaimed 'SCO is awesome'. i was a bit taken aback, but after he explained himself i agree.
:) ....
it goes a little something like this: SCO is awesome because they guys are just so UTTERLY ridiculous. as idiotic as their thinking is, you have to respect the confidence they have to send out invoices. it is sort of like those poor flys and insects who are attracted to the bright lights of a bug zapper - as many times as they've seen their comrades electrocuted, they still have the wherewithal to fly directly to their deaths. well SCO, you haven't got long to live, so you might as well go out with a bang.
feel free to send me that invoice, by the way, i'm out of toilet paper
smd4985
BTW, Darl, I'm looking for a new job. Considering that I have no legal experience whatsoever, can think of loads of silly lawsuits in under 5 minutes (see above), I think I'll fit in perfectly with your legal team.
After the big scene a few weeks back where they showed off their supposed code and had dozens of predated generic counter examples on the web within hours I thought the whole thing sort of faded out.
It was pretty obvious there was no case to be made. It seemed to have been covered pretty well in the mainstream press as well. At least I that was the impression I got. Oh well, I guess they're just puffing their chests till they can unload the rest of their shares.
I have a qustion for the Slashdot community: at what point should I/we short-sell SCOX? If we're so confident that SCO will lose this war, then obviously there's a whole helluva lot of money to made off their dying stock. As far as I've noticed, interested parties seem to be quite successful in duping the general investing public into pumping-up the stock. This isn't necessarily a bad thing if in the long run we know they'll lose. The higher it goes, the farther it'll fall, the more money to make. If not for direct or personal profit, wouldn't this at least be a sure-fire way to fund open source projects everywhere?
SCO's plans to send out license invoices to Linux vendors for 'Unix license fees for Linux.'
The key phrase is 'Unix license'.
The answer:
FreeBSD, NetBSD, Mac OS X, OpenBSD, BSDi (if you are mad at your money) and GNU/FreeBSD (from Debian)
And, when you move, send SCO a nice letter letting them know that you moved, so they can send a forwarding lawsuit.
The EE Times article states that the open-source movement "depends on the GPL". Is that really true? GPL is definitely a popular license, but what would really happen if it went away? If the Linux kernel were re-released under the BSD license tomorrow it might signal an end to all this nonsense.
This is the most interesting thing I've seen so far today: "Docket Text: Return of service executed re: Subpoena served on Canopy Group c/o Ralph Yanno on 8/26/03" -- here.
Could this be IBM going for the neck of the hydra? That would be... wonderful.
Belief is the currency of delusion.
...you can refer to when SCO start FUDing about "liability for Linux customers"?
If Audi stole Honda's copyrighted engine design, would Audi owners be sued because they their car contains a part that is the result of copyright infringement? No.
Isn't there some law, some precedence you can easily refer to and dismiss this as FUD? It'd do a lot to stop (corporate) Linux end-users from worrying.
Because, even if all of SCOs wild claims are right, I still don't see how there is any possible grounds for customer liability. But I've yet to see a piece of legislation that actually says so.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
People are actually BUYING this STOCK!
The insiders must have buyers to whom to sell their stock. The question is WHO in their RIGHT MIND would even CONSIDER buying this stock??
"Sometimes the truth is stupid." - Lawrence, creator of Prime Intellect
Finance Manager: Got this invoice from SCO for some linux licenses, but it doesn't reference a Purchase Order number.
Me: We never ordered anything from them
Finance Manager: Do we use this Linux thing?
Me: Yes, but we bought it through Redhat, here is the approved purchase orders and copies of our payment vouchers
Finance Manager: So we have no business relationship with this company, nor received any goods or services from them?
Me: No
Finance Manager: Thanks, I'll forward it to the state attorney general's office for investigation.
At the very least sending fraudulent invoices, and misrepresenting a disputed issue must be a criminal action ?
What does sco's staff consist of ? Every loser that the canopy group could find ? Do they all figure that knowingly participating in a criminal conspiracty won't have repercussions for them.
If you work at SCO and are reading this, ask yourself why isn't Microsoft willing to do its own dirty work and do you think they will come to your rescue if this hits the fan.
The probable truth is that SCO is getting free press every day, and /. is certainly no exception there. Didn't it ever occur to folks here that press is all they're looking for?
SCO bigwigs don't expect their company to pull through this, and they don't really care. All they're doing is keeping their company in the news and giving current and potential investors the impression that they are an aggressive, profit-driven company.
Once they have deemed that investors have thrown enough money their way (and driven the stock price high enough), they will bail. This will end with SCO a flaming wreck, and its executives rich, and that's ALL they want.
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
excellent analysis!!
is buying the stock, just like it bought Enron. The problem with stocks is 401K's where you can only pick between mutual funds.
Look, Canopy owns SCO. Ray Noorda owns Canopy. Ray Noorda is the guy we need to go after.
From this I gathered that IBM is doing the bare minimum they need to, and are letting SCO burn itself out. I also postulated that Arnold Schwarzenegger was refusing to be in the California debates to distance himself from the pack of other contenders, and raise his importance/stature above that of the masses.
Just like IBM, to fit so much information in a very small space.
So protection from software IP has nothing to do with their business.
It makes as much sense as offering protection if Windows is found to have stolen IP..
That sound you hear is all the Canopy bulk erasers/shredders starting up...
Allright! MY BSC (Blood SCO Content) was getting low, what with the last SCO story being nearly a week ago. Thank you Slashdot.... what a rush.
Must... have.... more.
READ post before modding. Asswipe.
Note that when SCO Mgtmt are selling stocks, that doesn't mean they think they are about too loose. If, instead, they think they are about to win and they see that nobody else thinks that, well... then the plan is too reduce the market value as much as possible. Then, at a well-choosen day, they start buying like hell, pressing the price up... probably the same day they start sending invoices.
Docket Text: Return of service executed re: Subpoena served on Canopy Group c/o Ralph Yanno on 8/26/03
The guy's name is Ralph Yarro actually. I happen to have met him personally when the Canopy company I worked for held its last Christmas party and he's definitely your typical hateable VC investor.
Good for him if he gets into trouble. That'll make my company's 7 rounds of layoffs in 2 years easier to swallow.
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
First off, SCO would have to pay value added tax (VAT) on every invoice it issued (in the UK this would amount to 17.5%) which is a pretty major disincentive to start sending out invoices you have little chance of collecting. There is also the question (which is open) as to whether they would be committing the criminal offence of obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception.
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11321
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH, SCO = PWNED
"SCO will pursue commercial Linux users who have discussed their Linux work publicly, Stowell said. However, it won't take action until it's done more research on those businesses, he added."
Yeah, they want to see if they will put up a fight in court or can afford a lawsuit.
This is strong arm tactics plain and simple. The fact they are selling off stocks means that they are hedging their bets. They are playing it safe in case it doesnt go their way.
"You're on my side and the dark side, like Lando Calrissian?" --Gimpy, Undergrads
Don't count me as a supporter of the SCO nonsense, but it's often a financial strategy for executives at any company to file their intent to sell 5,000 shares a month, every month, as a planned way to diversify their portfolio. I mean, when you have 3 million shares, 5,000 is a drop in the bucket. Then again, when a VP only has 25,000 shares, dumping 15,000 in one month is suspicious. Okay, I'm convinced, they're dumping it!
Show your love for the Hacker community
HackerLogo.com
I think it only fair to return the claimed 50% Linux IP infringement to SCO. Just cut your Linux CDs in half and mail to SCO in lieu of remittance. After all, it was sort of like getting that unexpected book in the mail with an invoice attached. Just send it back. SCO imagines getting 10% compliance from Linux users. I bet we can do better with this plan.
By the way, IANAL, just a provocateur.
Copyright law is, as the name suggests, all about the right to make copies. Audi owners certainly don't make copies of Audi engines.
However, Linux owners DO (in legal terms) make copies of Linux code; they copy it into RAM before they run it and that counts as making a copy.
(IANAL)
brinkmanship
Soon to be replaced by SCOmanship.
Conversion Rate Optimisation French / English consultant
Please note that to have any basis whatsoever to bill you, SCO needs to demonstrate not only that "Linux" infringes, but that your build of Linux infringes. They haven't remotely done the first, much less the second.
And that's even if an end-user could be found liable, as the often-mentioned reader-of-an-infringing-New-York-Times analogy addresses.
As it stands now, this is analogous to a company that sells classical music billing you because they've heard you have classical music in your CD collection, and it's absurd.
~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
Hateful M$ bastards, die die M$ !!!
...
No wait, the date is an odd number, so it a SCO day today on Slashdot.
Hateful SCO bastards, die die SCO !!!
Seriously though, let's all have a laugh once and for all, let's all ignore them and their letters and let the SCC investigate possible illegal insider's trading issues. I mean, the entire thing is so blown up out of proportion here it's not even funny anymore. SCO is ridiculous and the world keeps turning
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
I use Linux. Used it for years.
By the way, McBride, I've got my license fees right here between my legs. Come and suck it, err, 'collect' it. Yeah, that's it.
PHONY INVOICE SCAMS
The anatomy of a typical phony invoice scheme is as follows:
The Call:
While there is no set formula for these invoice schemes, most involve the use of an initial telephone contact. The call helps the swindler obtain the names of key business contacts, as well as some important details about the operation of the business and its products or services. The persons making these calls are, for the most part, remarkably smooth operators. Often brazen and forward in their approach, they have been known to talk their way through a chain of receptionists, secretaries, assistant managers, supervisors, and vice presidents to gain access to heads of companies. In most cases, however, they need gain access to only lower-level employees.
The Invoice:
The con artist's next contact with the intended victim usually comes in the form of a phony invoice sent through the mail. The invoice, which includes names, figures, and other details that add to the appearance of legitimacy, may be paid unwittingly along with a number of other routine bills. In many cases, the amount of the invoice is just small enough to slip by the check writer's attention. The swindler has had considerable experience calculating the most effective dollar amount, depending on variables such as the size of the firm, and the control it seems to have over its management system. Thousands of mass-mailed invoices, each for a small sum, may prove more luc-rative for the con artist, than several large invoices.
The Scare Tactic:
Scare tactics sometimes are used to increase the odds of success. A phony invoice, or past-due notice, stamped "Pay This Bill Now" or "We Are About to Start Action" may intimidate the victim into rushing to make out a check without carefully investigating the supposedly delinquent charge.
SOLICITATIONS AS INVOICES
One of the most common variations of the phony invoice scheme are solicitations disguised as invoices. These documents, which are actually solicitations for the purchase of goods or services, are carefully designed to look like legitimate invoices for goods or services ordered and received. In some cases, the small print may identify the bogus bill as a solicitation. The deceptive solicitation may be received through the mail, or it may be presented in person by a con artist who visits a business office on the pretext of saving the company handling charges.
The business that pays a solicitation disguised as an invoice may receive the merchandise or service it was duped into ordering; more often, it will not, and efforts to trace the fraudulent firm that issued the "invoice" will prove futile.
If they're sending via USMail, and you live in the US and receive one, send a copy to the USPS Postal Inspector. That's mail fraud, and the USPS takes a dim view of such things.
I suspect the FTC wouldn't particularly like it either... Your state's Attorney General might be interested in the extortion issue, too.
The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
The guy's name is Ralph Yarro actually.
Typical OCR error, r -> n
There are many companies that make their fortunes sending out semi-fraudulant invoices. Many of them even call you up to remind you to pay. This is not uncommon, and the scary thing is a lot of businesses do pay.
These commonly include services such as being listed in businesses directories. These services are really sleazy and manipulative. They commonly send out advertisements for their services designed to look like invoices and they include wording to make it look like it's overdue. Many of the business directory ones use directories that don't exist beyond an unknown website..
The point is if SCO starts sending out invoices they are going to make money. Lots of medium sized companies will pay an invoices under a couple thousand to avoid possible lawsuits and many of them will pay smaller invoices without even knowing why. SCOs plan will work for a little while.. until the lawsuit, at least..
SCO says:
"We are going to send invoices to Linux users any time now"
"We are going to send invoices to Linux users any day now, and if they don't pay we will SUE them."
"We are going to send invoices to Linux users this month, and if they don't pay we will SUE them... and we MEAN IT."
"We are probably going to send invoices to Linux users before the end of this month and if they don't pay we will give them every opportunity to pay before we sue them."
Soon, with Apu's accent:
"We are going to nicely send invoices to Linux users before the end of the year and if they don't pay... we will nicely send them invoices again."
Just wake me up when there is news that somebody actually received one of these invoices, no need to make ten stories about them sending them RSN each time they threaten to send them.
"The obvious mathematical breakthrough would be development of an easy way to factor large prime numbers." Bill Gates,
I just realized that with linux getting very close to going prime-time, as evidenced by the media's attention and now a big hardware vendor like Dell offering linux (no slight to Lindows intended), it's a great time for the SCOes of the world to dig through their ... ahem ... IP ... to find potential sources of new revenue. It suddenly makes sense.
To-do List: Receive telemarketing call during a tornado warning. Check.
Here's the mail fraud complaint form.
Hint: Select "False Bill or Notice" when you fill this out.
Show your hate for SCO. Get a cool t-shirt and donate to the Open Source Now Fund.
This is like the director of Gigli getting quoted as saying "I've seen worse movies [than Gigli]" Next McBribe will be showing off a server stats chart to stock holders as proof of sco's growing relevance in the high tech world. You probably don't know how hard I laughed while reading "SCO declares GPL invalid".
IANAL, so this is a legit question. SCO has not proven their case, it has yet to go to trial, yet they are threatening lawsuits, putting out invoices, etc. This seems like classic extortion to me, so why has no one brought suit against SCO on these grounds?
You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.
A bill comes in, it gets routed to A/P, it comes from someone the company has paid before, and it ends up getting payed.
SCO will make some money off this. Whether it's money they get to keep, and whether it's money they'll be fined on top of having to pay it back, are questions that will have to be answered by the courts. Makes you wanna throw up, doesn't it?
They're obviously not too scared of SCO - they're hiring a paralegal to take care of everything.
SCOmbags.
...you get your incorrect Simpsons-quote corrected within 5 minutes.
by BigDumbAnimal (532071) on Wednesday September 03, @11:02AM (#6858949)
"and if my accountant is watching please STOP PAYMENT on this check"
by Anonymous Cowtard (573891) on Wednesday September 03, @11:06AM (#6858989)
Incorrect, it's:
Krusty: "And if my banker is watching, let nothing STOP you from PAYMENT on this check."
... that suing people isn't a viable business model. The ship is sinking, and the vultures are just getting whatever they can.
What has SCO 'released' or 'innovated' recently? I don't know. even if they did release something, it isn't nearly as important as suing people.
Real businesses sell products and services, and innovate and compete in a market. this company is suing people, which isn't a viable market strategy. The execs will get what they deserve, the company will fail.
Reason, free market capitalism, and individualism
Companies receiving these invalid invoices should start filing counter actions, i.e. file SEC complaint, criminal (fraud, RICO) complaints, etc.
The cost is relatively low to file these types of complaints (less than the cost of a SCO "license").
The cost to SCO of answering all of these would begin to take on real proportions.
Watch SCO insider stock transactions then.
"I now inform you that you are too far from reality."
AC comments get piped to
To: SCO
From: Linux Company with many machines
Dear SCO,
I have here in front of me your invoice saying that I owe you a license fee. In your letter you do not say what exactly infringes upon your IP, thus making it impossible for us to remove it. Even more disturbing is that you have yet to prove that any violation of you IP has taken place in a court of law. You seem to have gotten the cart before the horse and there is no legal precedant for us to pay for any "alleged violations".
Upon advice of counsel this letter is being turned over to our local state's attorney with a complaint. It is our feeling that SCO is attempting to illegally extort money from our organization. SCO's recent press releases are so inflated and obvioulsy false that we are going to pursue a class action civil suit and also file a complaint with the SEC. It is my personal feeling that you are no different than a mobster asking for protection money.
Sincerely,
Joe Linux User
The thing that disturbs me is that some in our community think tha SCO has shown it's "best hand" at recent events. If you truly think that, then you are sadly mistaken. SCO is running a media showcase, and NOTHING is "leaked" or gets out that isn't meant to. Think along the lines of a magicians miss direction. SCO probably doesn't have a case, but it most certainly has better "code" snippets than has been shown to anyone outside of the legal and technical team bringing suit.
"Science is about ego as much as it is about discovery and truth " - I said it, so sue me.
Isn't this against the law in some way? They're harming everyone who invested money in sco and the employees by steering it directly at a train wreck. Not to mention the slanderous lies they are spewing around everyday.
But the high paid executives doing this don't care. They don't give one shit. They just want to get as much money out of the stock as possible in a short period of time. They're probably issuing each other multi-million dollar unsecured loans and stock options as we speak.
What a load of thieves. If anyone deserves to go to jail it's these fuckers. If they really believed their claims had any chance of being for real they would ALL hold on to ALL of their stock, not dump it.
And you wanna know what else makes me angry? The people who are buying their stock right now. They're the ones who make this scheme work, be it out of stupidity or whatever, by making the scox price higher. Fuck them too.
Liberty.
Filed: 08/28/03
Entered: 08/29/03
Return of service executed
Docket Text: Return of service executed re: Subpoena served on Canopy Group c/o Ralph Yanno on 8/26/03
If they can prove that SCO was not an independent corporation, it's all over for Big Brother and his holding company. This is not discovery - that would have been against SCO.
A few definitions from Black's law.
"Estoppel" means that party is prevented by his own acts from claiming a right detriment of other party who was entitled to rely on such conduct and acted accordingly. Graham v. Asbury, 112 Ariz. 184, 540 P.2d 656, 658.
A principle that provides that an individual is barred from denying or alleging a certain fact or state of facts because of that individuals previous conduct, allegation, or denial. A doctrine which holds that an inconsistent position, attitude, or course of conduct may not be adopted to loss or injury of another. Brand v. Farmers Mut. Protective Ass'n or Texas, Tex,Civ.App., 95 S.W.2d 994, 997.
Thus by matter of record, SCO is Estopped from asserting any claims to the distribution or usage of GPL code which SCO has itself distributed. SCO is also prohibited by the doctrine of "Apparent authority" from asserting the claim that the distribution was not authorized.
Basically, an open and shut case. SCO loses. (Defendant should seek both costs and scantions on plaintiff)
Looking through the history of 2:03cv00294/ SCO Grp v Intl Bus Mach Inc, I found the schedule for when things are going to happen.
10/1: Amending of Pleadings
10/22: Discovery Cutoff
11/10: Deadline for Filing motions
3/11/05: Attorney Conference
3/28/05: Final Pretrial Conference for 2:30
4/11/05: 5 Week Jury Trial
By the 22nd of next month, SCO will have to release to IBM the offending code as part of the discovery phase. The question is how fast it will be leaked.
And we get to watch this whole specatacle until May!
Can I contest the bill later if I ask for one to be sent to me? I mean, this is something worth framing. Can you imagine what kind of a conversation piece such a statement would be? It would look so nice under my mounted jackalope.
who are those slashdot people? they swept over like Mongol-Tartars.
I'm going to incorporate some company, claim to have acquired copyright to Windows XP, and start sending notices to all of Microsoft's customers demanding to be paid $500 per cpu. Oh, and I'll also sue Microsoft, IBM for $100 billion in damages.
It will be months before it's determined that lawsuit is baseless, but in the meantime the media will play up the story and even if 1/10,000th of Microsoft's customers pay up, that's still a sizable chunk of money, for doing absolutely nothing!
Give credit where credit is due: This is the result of an overly complex, ambiguous, highly exploitable system of law. We are looking at a problem with government, not the corporations which are only playing the hand they've been dealt.
If we want to address the problem, we need to cure the disease. Attacking the symptoms won't do a damn thing to change the way things work.
Mcbride Darl C
1799 E Vintage Oak Ln
Holladay UT 84121
(801) 424-2006
enjoy.
I have just contacted SCO and provided them with my name and address asking them to please include me in their Linux/GPL users list. Some of the most insightful /.er's have noted that it is indeed mail fraud to extor... err I mean request money from individuals by placing them under duress, not to mention the fact that there have been no services rendered and no indication that they are correct in billing.
/.ing their site daily we could very well influence the 36 second press release cycle they happen to be on.
It would behoove all linux users and companies to use their respective state councils, the trade commission and other consumer advocacy groups to place pressure on SCO to (ready for it.... here it comes.. the cliche is) put up or shut up. It would be a challenge for SCO to justify it's racketeering in several states simultaneously. The problem is that SCO is not in a defensive posture and they need to be. We have too many companies (IBM Included) that are too willing to wait for their day in court.
/.er's are a passionate people and if we would put our effort into making life difficult for sco beyond
There's only one plausible reason why the SCO execs are still running their mouths off. It can only be blamed on the free lunches they are receiving at all these anti-Linux functions they are speaking at. Stop the madness! Stop the free lunch insanity!
Yes, it's dirty, but it obviously works for those selling otherwise moribund stock in SCO. The best thing the Linux distributors can do in this case is simply ignore SCO. Sooner or later they'll get bitchslapped in the courts by the big players whom they've taken the trouble to directly offend, and they'll crawl back into the compost whence they came.
They will have to act. Sending out blanket invoices to companies in hopes that some percentage of them paying, sounds like an illegal get rich scheme to me.
Otherwise, why don't we all just create invoices and just swamp the corporate world with $54 invoices for 1 box of Xerox paper?
None of the three articles say that SCO is going after vendors distributing Linux.
On a side note, its been weeks since I called the 1st time to SCO so I could write them a check (NOT), and they have not called back. I currently "owe" about 100k, and soon that will be escalated to 128k.
Think I will call again to see what their holdup is....
Linux/GNU is "protected" under GPL.
SCO has tossed aside GPL as unenforceable.
SCO is charging users for IP it claims was originally generated at SCO.
SCO, under the name Caldera, distributed Linux/GNU software
Does the door swing both ways? Can individuals within the open source community turn around and sue SCO/Caldera for distributing its intellectual property?
I mean, if SCO is claiming the GPL isn't valid and only the original copyright holder can claim copy right, didn't they illegally distribute TONS of illegally copied software?
:wq
Then feel free to send an invoice for any amount you like to:
The SCO Group
355 South 520 West
Suite 100
Lindon, Utah 84042 USA
801-765-4999 phone
801-765-1313 fax
Oh, and be sure not to tell them what the code is. We don't want them "laundering" it.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
I wonder if it would be possible for the Slashdot readership to buy enough stock, set up a proxy block and stage a hostile take over of SCO.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
I guess IBM is pretty sure to win the case against SCO, so why don't they just say that they will offer protection from eventual claims and thus steal all of Dell's would be customers?
They believe they own the rights to said product.
They are demanding a license fee to make you legal, or you are subject to a suit.
Nothing illegal about it, if they believe they are in the right.
Time may prove they are totally off the deep end and don't hold the rights, but they currently believe it, and are pursuing a legal course.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Lindon, Utah has now been designated as a Class 1 nuclear whipping boy. At the outside of nuclear war, the United States and all of our allies will use Lindow as a testing area to calibrate all of our nukes.
To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
--E.C. Stanton
anybody care to start sending invoices to SCO for their use of GPL and BSD software?
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
you're right, its probably not extortion, but it certainly may come under Federal Mail Fraud charges
OOOOOH! I hope they send some to Minnesota!! PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE!
I know Attorney General Mike Hatch is looking for another bich to slap
Old age and treachery almost always overcome youth and skill.
From the looks of it, the SCO execs continue to sell more and more stock (at that level you can't just dump it or you can get in trouble). It is entirely possible that this is nothing more than a pump and dump operation they are trying to disguise. They just want to keep it out of the shitter for long enough to cash out, then the result isn't relivant.
SCOX briefely tops $16 per share
I don't think SCO is stupid enough to actually send invoices. That could get them in legal hot water.
I doubt most companies are going to blindly roll over and pay them. If one shows up, they'll ask their Linux salesperson, or inhouse Linux geek, who will most likely tell them not to pay it.
As another poster pointed out, if you do actually receive one, send copies to the Postal inspector, and Attorney General.
By reading this sig, you agree to the terms of my sig license.
I sent them a form I recieved from a Versign partner that looked like a bill for a domain I own (I register with someone else). It did technically note it wasn't a bill on teh back in small print, but the FTC was interested none the less.
I am currently using 2 copies of Mandrake 9.1. .
Could you please send me one of your invoices.
I am going to cell it on the Ebay as a souvenir
after your company will become a history
Sincerely.
Is it kentucky fried Enron?
I think that's what it smell like to me, but then again, I don't have a nose. I don't even have ears.
I forget what that's from. Was that bender? Who was it?!
"You can go f*ck yourselves."
I think it's very sound. As a matter of fact, I believe they are following it at the moment.
Daniel
Carpe Diem
If you get one of these letters, I suggest you go to this link:
l Fr audComplaint.htm
https://www.usps.com/postalinspectors/fraud/Mai
Essentially, sending a fraudulant invoice through the US mails is a crime:
"Extortion (18 USC 873, 876 & 877)
Postal Inspectors investigate extortion and blackmail when demands for ransoms or rewards are sent through the U.S. Mail. Inspectors also strictly enforce laws prohibiting mail that contains threats of kidnapping, physical injury, or injury to the property or reputations of others
Mail Fraud (18 USC 1341, 1342 & 1345; 39 USC 3005 & 3007)
The Postal Inspection Service is committed to protecting postal customers from misuse of the mail. Inspectors place special emphasis on mail fraud scams related to advance fees, boiler rooms, health care, insurance, investments, deceptive mailings and other consumer frauds, especially when they target the elderly or other susceptible groups."
The guys who investigate it are U.S. Postal Inspectors, who have very draconian powers, and have very wide-ranging jurisdiction.
The SCO case demonstrates the desparate need for Tort Reform in this country.
SCO has no case. They are all smoke and mirrors. However, the money required to hire the lawyers to fight SCO will probably cost more than paying SCO. Second of all, SCO can do more damage to Linux companies than SCO is worth.
Also, SCO's strategy of suing the end users is pure extortion. Even if SCO was right and Linux did infringe on SCO's IP, there is absolutely no legal precedent for holding the end users liable, especially since SCO will not mention the infringing code. However, the cost of fighting the lawsuit is greater than the cost of paying SCO. Extortion, pure and simple.
The best tort reform (which would also be useful in the DirecTV case) would be to not allow the suit to be filed unless the plaintiff presented evidence of wrong doing and legal liability on the part of the defendant. Unless the plaintiff can show this, the courts shouldn't even give them the time of day.
Ok, well, now, hold on. Lets breath for a moment. Now just because a public statement was made by a stock dumper doesn't mean it will become reality. How often have we seen this type of hype from SCO? There is a definate pattern here of falsehoods, threats, retractions just to keep the whole thing running. Here's my bitch. I really have to say that the state of IT journalism just sucks. It really sucks. All I see is a bunch of press releases forwarded by the IT press. So if IBM isn't talking they just sit back and watch, and repeat the FUD? Heh guys (not that you're reading), but get out there are research this story or something. If I want SCO press releases and propoganda I can just go to their website.... well, not at least in Germany. And thats my second bitch. Granted German courts are likely to be more receptive to anti-sco arguments, but why hasn't there been any such injunctions filed in the US, or UK? Where is Red Hat and IBM. I can understand legal strategy, but there is real damage happening here to the Linux marketing image. We have no one to blame but ourselves... cuz we, and they are doing nothing.
I've been swashdotted -- Elmer Fudd
It was that
para 106-122 of copyright law. I won't bore you with details here (its very long), but it boils down that there is nothing that says that having a copy of a work is a violation. It is all about reproduction and distribution.
Real world example time. I write a book and I sell First North American publishing rights to XYZ publisher. They publish a european edition of my book, which is a violation of my copyright, since I did not sell them those rights. Do I sue or invoice everyone with a copy of my book in europe or do I sue the publisher. The publisher of course since they are the infringing party.
The simple matter of this is that SCO should be suing the distributors and not the end users, since they have no right to do so!
Their legal thinking on this whole debacle has been laughable from the beginning. What is my opinion? I think they're trying to get a bunch of gullable folks to send them money. And, oh yeah, their claims are full of shit.
The one claim by SCO's legal group that really bothers me (as an unpublished author) is the whole "GPL contravene's federal law by allowing more than one copy" crap. That would be in reference to Para 117: Limitations on exclusive rights: Computer programs, section a. This is a limitation on me as a developer to say that I do not have the right to claim that someone making a copy in order to use or archive is infringing. This in no way can be construed to mean that I as the author of a program cannot give people additional rights. It just means that I have to give them AT LEAST the right to make those copies. Heise and Boies both should be disbarred for those statements. Ok rant over, I feel better.
I'm sure it goes without saying, but IANAL. Just someone who knows enough to read the law.
Post anonymously - For when your opinion embarrasses even you!
"SCO will pursue commercial Linux users who have discussed their Linux work publicly" I use Linux. Didn't pay a cent for it. Send me one of those vouchers. I'm low on toilet paper.
YoU'RE OnLY HElPiNG ThEM
BIG DRINKS
Achille Talon
Hop!
Wasn't this the scheme that Tom Cruise used to bring down "The Firm"?
"I'm not impatient. I just hate waiting." - My Dad
Mail fraud.
where he gets the clients of "The firm" to sign a waiver to release their bills? You know the one where the firm gets sued for mail fraud. If SCO did it, it would constitute mail fraud, since they haven't proven their case. Hopefully some lawyer will elaborate if that is true.
mod parent up
Linux != Unix.
Sounds like somebody's been smoking something funny.
There's a big loophole in the insider trading laws and the SCO execs are taking advantage of it. There is a safe harbor if you have a plan to sell shares at predetermined points in time over a long enough period. The SCO execs have such a plan filed back in January at the same time that the lawsuit grumblings began to be heard.
Look for another press release to boost the stock price next Monday, September 8, when some of the top execs will be selling again.
I have discovered a truly marvelous sig, unfortunately the sig limit is too small to contain i
The gist of the case at this point seems to be that IBM allegedly released some code which was granted to SCO by a company IBM previously acquired. IBM's contract with SCO doesn't require them to give changes back to SCO, but Sequent's (and others') contracts did. This is ambiguous enough that no judge would award SCO damages unless SCO had worked in good faith to help IBM repair the damages and IBM hadn't then acted in good faith; from all appearances, SCO hasn't taken any steps in that direction. Instead, SCO have capitalized on the alleged mistake over and over again, already recovering the worth of the allegedly infringing code a thousand times over.
It has been stated that Linux distributors do not indemnify users against IP claims made on the software they distribute. In reading the Microsoft EULA it is vividly clear that the same holds there. Microsoft does not indemnify users against IP claims made on Windows and other Microsoft products. Users agree to this when they install the Windows XP operating system. Read your MS EULA for details. This is apparently standard operating procedure for MS.
There are products out there that do indemnify users and state so specifically in their license agreements. One example of a eula that indemnifies the end user is the one provided by Altova Inc. with it's XMLSpy application.
I think that anyone who has contributed to Linux code (hell, or even used Linux) should file a lawsuit in your state. Lets see how their legal team can handle a couple of million cases.
And doesn't Texas have some arcane law about how it's legal to shoot someone if they're too damn dumb to live?
Come, Americans. You've got more guns than you have people. Surely you can take care of the SCO problem!
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
Can't RedHat, or SuSE or IBM for that matter get an injunction against SCO similar to that granted in Germany?
You know, along the lines: stop flapping and show the evidence...
Is it just a coincidence that people may be recieving invoices at the same time that SCO must answer IBM's countersuit? Could they be trying to bury that news in the noise of news about people getting invoiced? Hmm, naaaah. Wait, what am I thinking, this is SCO! Of course it's another scheme!
Post anonymously - For when your opinion embarrasses even you!
Is if they sell out. SCO stock dips as it strangles... then IBM steps in and buys out SCO for a low price, SCO is cleansed of evil and stock soars to new heights. By then, the execs won't have any more SCO stock so they don't benefit.
What I wonder is... who are the brain-cases that are actually buying this stock, and why (unless perhaps they're expecting a scenario as above with long-term growth)
I've decided to redirect all web visitors from the sco.com domain to some arbitrary porn website.
Hopefully, this will prevent them from finding my online linux business/website and targeting me with an invoice. If EVERYONE did the same, or something similar we could really put a world of hurt on sco's internet domain.
Don't think that a small group of dedicated individuals can't change the world. It's the only thing that ever has.
In the great pattern of things, the end-user doesn't have responsibility to SCO but to the vendor. Now, I can go out and buy a playstation or whatever in a good-faith purchase. If company X suddenly discovered that the playstation core used their technology/code, they can't invoice me for the cost of the code - that goes to the vendor.
Even in the best of cases for SCO, charging the end-user hardly sounds like a legitimate practice. In any software case I've heard of, it's the parent company/companies that end of paying out
I'm waiting for the toilet bowl made from lacquered SCO invoices...
That way we can take a dump on SCO every day!
Nothing here yet, but maybe someone will auction off photocopies of his SCO invoice.
Better yet, just scan it, save as a PDF, put it up on your webserver, we'll slashdot the hell out of it (and a couple hastily-assembled mirrors too), print out the invoice, do our duty and send a whole big load of crap SCO's way...
--ZK
who's that fat chick in the corner, and why is she humming???
I think if more people sent this to dell they may change there tune.
also, SCO send me an invoice. ill sue the fuck out of you. make lots of money and use it to shortsel your stock.
and to the developers, shame on you, how can you just stand by and let SCO steal your work. by not acting you have already let SCO win the OS war for Microsoft and you are responsible for the death of Linux
Please Forward this to the sales staff.
My name is EXXXX and I manage the computers for the XXXXl. i have recently read an article that your company will not offer protection against the SCO Licensing scam. We currently have about 26 Dell computers and we were considering a Cluster and Grid setup for our compute farm. using about 30 Servers. i would like you to know that my department will no longer use dell products, also we will be exchanging our dell computers for IBM. your attitude toward Linux and you abandonment of the Linux community is incorrigible, and i refuse to do business with a company who will not support its customers. we can only use Linux and UNIX systems with our computations, and we cannot risk our business with a company who will not support us.
When SCO distributes it's "invoices" it will oficially be breaking the law. Without a legal buyer-seller agreeement, and without any court determination as to whether SCO's claims are legitimate, a counter-suit can be filed for extorsion. Get your legal department involved! Talk to your company's lawyers about filing a class-action suit.
SCO has already made it clear that any company getting this "invoice" is likely to be high on theie list to be sued. Companies should look at this as a threat and be pre-emptive. Further, a group of large companies filing a class action against SCO would be the best means of expediting the process and gaining closure.
By not having any buyer-seller agreement, and no legally recognized right to to the code they claim, SCO is no better than the neighborhood mafioso looking for protection money.
Mobster SCO: "I have no service to sell you, and I have no legal right to demand money by law, but I am billing you anyway. If you don't pay up...something "bad" will happen." Isn't this the classic definition of extorsion?
"Curiosity killed the cat, but for a while I was a suspect."- Steven Wright
ESR,
It would appear Darl's called the bluff in your open letter. Now, as our self appointed supreme leader and Jedi knight, exactly what are you going to do about it besides rant?
adolf gates
heinrich mcbride
josef sontag
hermann boies
seig heil, mein fuehrer
To whom it may concern:
As you are violating the GPL by claiming some of the code you destributed is now covered by your copyright, And as I retain the copyright to a portion of the Linux code you now must license from me, I am submitting this invoice.
Please remit $50,000 for the license to use my code as soon as possible as interest charges will accrue.
-
Any other Linux developer want to join in some action to bill SCO for their non-GPL use of our IP?
Extortion is when you use fear to extract money
from people you have no prior business relationship,
and without giving reasons why they legaly have
to pay you. I am sorry, "pay so I don't report
you to the authorities", or "pay so I don't
sue you" is illegal. It is simple extortion,
as plain as it can possibly be.
I'm expecting something that could better be described as "a rupture in a submarine's hull at crush depth".
:)
"leak" indeed
we didn't pay Eoloas's invoice for using MISE why would pay yours Dayrl McBride?
Don't Tread on OpenSource
As P.T. Barnum (of the circus fame) once said, "there's sucker born every minute."
--Slashdot: News for Turds. Stuff that Splatters.
In other news, office products retailers across the USA noticed an overwhelming unpredicted demand for paper shredders.
You can't fool us.... You're SCO!
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
SCO: The Linux kernel has millions of lines of infringing SCO code.
Torvalds: You're smoking crack.
SCO: Would you believe one million?
Torvalds: No.
SCO: Would you believe 80 lines?
Torvalds: Doubtful.
SCO: How about two variables with the same names?
All this is publicly available Here
I ran some really rough numbers to figure out when these guys would be totally cashed out. It's interesting that although the records go back 2 years, none of this activity is prior to 6/20/03.
BENCH, ROBERT K.
Chief Financial Officer
221,043 shares held currently
21,000 sold since 7/8/03
Average: ~368 shares/day sold
totally sold off in 20 months
BROUGHTON, REGINALD C.
Senior Vice President
110,000 shares held currently
90,000 sold since 6/20/03
Average: ~1200 shares/day sold
totally sold off in 3 months
HUNSAKER, JEFF F.
Vice President
25,494 shares held currently
35,000 sold since 7/9/03
Average: ~625 shares/day sold
totally sold off in 1.3 months
OLSON, MICHAEL P
Controller
60,830 shares held currently
15,000 sold since 7/11/03
Average: ~278 shares/day sold
totally sold off in 7.3 months
WILSON, MICHAEL SEAN
Senior Vice President
6,000 shares held currently
12,000 sold since 7/15/03
Average: ~240 shares/day sold
totally sold off in 25 days
Does SCO honestly believe they have a leg to stand on? Sounds to me they just trying to buy time before they go bankrupt.
SCO's 10Q is due Sep 15.
SCO's reply to IBM is due Sep 25.
This could be an interesting month.
Once these execs are rich, we must not forget them.
We need a standard banner or so that remembers their filthy actions for a long long time by showing it on various open source web pages for ten years or so.
They're special, they're the first that really attacked the open source community, they need to be recognizable in public.
The above, of course, when we are entirely sure that they were just making money out of FUD about Linux.
You might want to send some information to SCO's business partners and ask them what they think about all this.
SCO currently provides detailed lists of such business partners: http://www.sco.de/partner/index.html and http://wdb1.sco.com/sdir_web/owa/ptrLocator.search
It might be a good idea to copy or mirror the information available there - SCO can withdraw that information at any time...
Expect SCO's lawyers to react with threatening legal mails if you contact their business partners.
Important: Do not be rude! Some of these companies do not like what SCO is doing.
Just in case that SCO ever tries to deny that they never planned on integrating Unix code into their distro of Linux...
I have found an audio file that will prove they did.
Go to the UnitedLinux press page, you'll find This mp3 file of the Teleconference.
from 7:21-7:39 into the sound file, Ransome Love states his intentions...
hughalughlugh lughlughlugh
Where is the SEC in all this? Doesn't anybody see that this is just a floundering company's feeble attempt to gain profit. This is clearly a case for the SEC. Look at the artificially inflated stock price. The executives are selling their crappy stock at huge gains by bringing up this trumped up lawsuit. The SEC should be having a field day with SCO. These guys are criminals and should be prosecuted for such blatant, slanderous tripe. Come on system! Work! It is just like Enron. Fake company and fake profits.
Microsoft is hosting a page called "Resources for Competing with Linux" with the news section pointing to all the best FUD stories. Does this add to the evidence that this whole thing is being encouraged by MS? Also on the same page under Microsoft's response to recent press there is a halloween style point by point rebuttal of a pro linux article, but I can't open it because it's protected by passport for some reason.
I'm pretty sure that SCO is going to be a great stock to hold onto. I'm hoping very much to get a job there. I keep checking their jobs page eagerly every day, but so far only the disappointing phrase "There are currently no job openings at SCO". Because so many top quality engineers are champing at the bit to work there, I will just have to be patient. I feel like a kid waiting outside a candy store that's about to open...
- First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
Worst case:
I buy Lindows for $49. It's already licenced from SCO and they still don't get my $699.
--
But then again I thought VCR+ was a stupid idea and would die a quick death--so what do I know?
Taken from page 12 of SCO's Q2 FY2003 quarterly report:
This is in a footnote to the company's financials. Yet, when the company's CEO speaks publicly about the matter (and the related actions the company is taking), none of these risk factors are mentioned. Intellectual property litigation is a high-risk proposition under any circumstances. Given the convoluted pedigree of the rights involved in this case, asserting that a favorable outcome is certain -- as Mr. McBride has done with every reporter he has talked to -- is speculation of the most pernicious order, and shows a reckless disregard of his duty to provide the investing public with an accurate statement of the company's affairs.
The conscientious exercise of that duty would seem especially important for a publicly-traded corporation where insiders or related parties own almost 50% of the outstanding stock, and millions of low-balled options are in the portfolios of executives and board members. Based on Mr. McBride's statements -- which are ultimately self-serving, since he has an interest in 800,000 options priced between $0.76 and $2.07 a share -- the price of SCOX has septupled in just six months. Whether its the product of fact or fiction remains to be seen, but there seems to be something very, very wrong with a CEO publicly contradicting the risks reported in a company's financial statement.
The trouble with practical jokes is that very often they get elected. -- Will Rogers
From the National Fraud Information Center:
If the invoice/treath came by mail (in the United States), contact U. S. Postal Inspection Service instead. They are more likely to investigate if more people comlain.
Assignment:
Even before the invoice goes out, national media, especially financial media read by the "pointy haired bosses", should print a "fraud warning" against this invoice. It should be factual, and state that legal proceedings are pending.
All SCO could have done about this was to sue for libel but that case would be even weaker, and also easier to understand for judges and the general public.
Irene KHAAAAAAN!
If SCO's allegations did have merit, and if SCO really wanted to get money from Linux users, why wouldn't they simply show the evidence they have?! Then business would see the evidence and would be compelled to pay and SCO would get a windfall.
But SCO is not doing that. They hide the alleged evidence and still demand payment. Thus, assuming SCO has evidence makes no sense. The ONLY way it makes sense is if SCO has no evidence and is merely trying to inflate its stock prices.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
Quite simply, it looks to me like these guys are getting mega options; they're exercising them at something like $1 per share, and then selling the stock from those options. If that's the case, then they're not going to run out of stock.
Essentially, they're rather choosing to pay themselves millions in fractional million increments, from money that people are paying into SCO.
Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
Go to the FBI homepage, and they have a section "Report corporate fraud"...
Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
If you look outside the jaded slashdot somebody is investing a lot of faith in SCOX.
Looking at the 3 month chart for SCOX it seems to coincide with the news releases for and against SCO, so why has the stock price been steadily increasing?
Despite my linux allegiance, I tend to trust people spending the cash more than those trolling the message boards.
SCO's actions vis a vis Linux infringement are completely independent of any "flaws" in the US legal system. In fact, I don't think any of their actions to date could even be considered illegal.
:-)
SCO has made bizarre claims. They have failed to substantiate them in any meaningful way. I don't think anybody fears the outcome of a lawsuit against an end user since they actually have no legal basis to do so. The only liability is on the part of the hypothetical person who released code that he or she did not have the copyrights to under the GPL.
The only reason to be concerned is the legal costs of answering any frivolous lawsuit they may introduce. However, Red Hat has established a fund to defend such claims, and I expect if I were to be sued from SCO, all I would have to do is publicize it and the donations would roll in.
All that is required of us is patience. Only the gullible are buying into SCO's claims. If the gullible stick with high TOC products or give SCO money, it gives those of us who don't yet another competitive advantage.
I urge everyone to relax and keep things in perspective. If you get an invoice lodge a fraud complaint with the USPS and your state A.G. office (or similar orginization if outside the U.S.). If you get sued, contact EFF, Red hat and the media. If none of this happens, please feel free to download the ISO's for one of the many fine distro's that are available.
The trouble is, many of us acquired an addiction to SCO stuff when it was mildly interesting-- legal maneuvers, kernel history, intrigue and incompetence. Now, all the SCO stories are about still-looming threats, old German court decisions, lack of indemnification, and continuing insider trades. I think the slashdot crew is cutting their smack more and more, and it's really not worth the effort to scan semi random responses, the odd death threat and peals of "Mummy! I'm scared."
Interesting comment from JF
Quote
Unless you are using the DMCA to get rubber-stamped subpoenas like the RIAA, a subpoena means you showed a judge enough evidence to convince them that you are probably right on a point related to the case.
The fact that IBM got a subpoena indicates that laid some pretty damning evidence in front of a judge. Any indication of which jurisdiction issued the subpoena?
If it was the courts there in Utah, that at least SQUARES the power of the evidence in my opinion given that SCO/Canopy has the hometown advantage. J.F. 9/3/03; 11:07:56 AM
Help fight continental drift.
Seems our foes at SCO are at it again. I emailed them to inquire about why they'd request license for my two desktops, two servers. They actually replied, requesting name, address and info about my Linux installations (distribution etc.). I've written a very, very detailed explanation about it (quoting LOTS of material showing how wacky they are. Just facts), and this has in turn been forwarded to another sales representative. Now two of them have read my description of their sillyness.
If, based on this, they send me an invoice, I'll take them to court for fraud (it's just like those fake phone dictionaries sending out masses of bills).
And if sufficient many of us keem them busy like this, they'll be too busy to get any work done.
The letter is a bit too long to post here, but I'll email it to anyone interested. Just please do not send them a copy of this! Use it as inspiration, write your own.
I'm in a Unix state of mind.
What would be the appropriate way to get one of these bogus invoices sent to me? I'd like an invoice so I can heckle them endlessly about exactly why I should pay them. Would emailing the sales dep't at SCO with an inquisitive "Hi, I run two copies of redhat, do I owe you money" be enough?
CommentBot 0.7a running with args "-module irritate,disagree -target random"
people keep throwing around the word 'class action' but a class action suit is usually in favor of the defendent. if SCO is being sued by a ton of people there is nothing they would like more than to wrap them all up with a single class action suit. By joining a class action suit you give up your right to sue for individual damages.
so NO CLASS ACTION against SCO. make them work, just file a normal civil suit. No one wins in a class action except SCO (for settling with just a slap on the wrist) and the lawers who get to charge premium rates and take their share from the top of the settlement. If asked to join a class action suit, DON'T! just file independently.
http://notanumber.net/
Although its true that many people aren't savy enough to relize that they are being tricked, it does not make it any more legal. A scam is a scam.
If they send the notice by mail your company should turn around an immediately ask for an invoice or purchase order. Contact your legal council if you have any questions but the law seems pretty clear. If SCO can not produce a record of what services have been rendered then there is no money to collect from you or your company.
Thanks for a great new idea SCO! 1. Leave an item of yours hidden in a walmart. 2. Sue walmart for taking your item, but refuse to identify the item. 3. ?Extortion? 4. Profit!
True genius is grasping a situation like a peice of fruit, and peircing it just right so that it drains dry.
Until proven they don't own the IP rights, they can demand anything reasonable that they want in the way of licenses..
.. ( but they can sue, then its on you to prove them wrong, not the other way around. )
Its their business.... Charging a licence for a product...
They CAN demand payment. until a judge says they don't have the right..
Now, conversely, until its proven you don't have to pay..
So what is the difficulty you have with the concept that they are charging a license for a product they own? Sure we all hate what is going on, but currently it IS 100% legal.
Also my statement that they "belive they are correct", removes them from being liable for something such as a extortion suit, or 'mail fraud' as others have tried to claim. Not that the ownership will or will not be judged to be true.. But its al about intent before you can yell 'fraud'.
Now if you can PROVE they knew better and it was fraud.. then all bets are off and they can be sued.. but its really really really hard to prove intent when it comes to a persons beliefs.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
What timing! My SCO invoice showed up in my mailbox just about the same time I ran out of toilet paper!!
Thanks SCO! You saved my day!
There are ways of detecting what OS you are running, even behind firewalls, that dont involve any intrusion..
Sure it can be faked.. but who does that now?
So they find a linux fingerprint, and send a DMCA demand for username/phonenumber/etc from your isp, much as the *IAA's are doing...
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Perhaps my perspective is wrong here, but isn't it a touch disingenious to in some way ask SCO to send me an invoice for the so-called Linux IP, then turn around and complain about fraud?
Asking them to send the invoice is just as good as ordering a product AFAIK.
In other words - Don't call them asking to be placed on their mailing list or anything else equally silly.
Ron Gage - Westland, MI
Since we live in the West, the biggest issue is the unethical behavior of SCO and its managers. We have justifiably criticized them for trying to extort money via these ridiculous invoices. However, we need to go beyond criticizing only them. They actually work for someone: the shareholders.
Yes. The SCO shareholders own SCO and ultimately decide whether McBride keeps his job. The shareholders are the most guilty party in these pump-and-dump and extortion schemes hatched by SCO managers since the shareholders have the power to terminate the employment of McBride. The list at LionShares indicates the 15 financial institutions holding the largest number of shares of the SCO Group. Together, they hold 15% of the total outstanding shares. These financial institutions must immediately hold a special session of shareholders in order to terminate the employment of the managers (like McBride) at SCO group.
We, Slashdotters, should check our mutual funds immediately. If they own any shares of the SCO Group, then we should transfer the money out of those funds. Furthermore, there are several socially responsible mutual funds (SRMFs). We must bring the unethical behavior of the SCO group to the attention of the SRMF managers. They are bound, by the terms of their SRMFs, to sell all shares of the SCO Group.
In an interview with CNET, SCO's new attorney said:
"The Canopy Group said SCO has got to hire somebody in-house to manage the IBM litigation,", Tibbits said.
Legal action hits SCO Web site
Sounds like a big pierce of the corporate veil to me.
in the last month and a half the senior VP has sold over $750,000 in stock. Others have also sold fairly substantial amounts
..........FULL STOP.
Library of Congress to use IBM, Linux
g =f d_top
http://news.com.com/2100-1016_3-5070809.html?ta
Not terrribly clever, but I guess it helps you to keep from pulling a Martha (Stewart)..
..........FULL STOP.
The big question is: Did that one company actually instigate this, or is SCO's strategy just evolving. I think the latter is more likely: SCO originally wanted to be bought by IBM, but now it's just spreading FUD in the hope of more "license fees" from that one GPL-hating company.
Pump-and-dump is a part of it too, of course, but the longer McBride and Canopy can keep SCO alive, in the news and with a high stock price, the more stock they can sell and the less likely they are to suffer justice. When it's all over and SCO files Chapter 7, a relatively long lifetime will enable the enriched executives to claim that they did actually have a long-term business plan that just went wrong, and that they weren't deliberately engaged in a criminal conspiracy.
Clicl here
He later played the voice for Tennesee Tuxedo a cartoon penguin, with a walrus sidekick
..........FULL STOP.
TOP 15 Institution Name
Integral Capital Mgmt
Pequot Capital Mgmt
Barclays Global Investors Intl
Whitney Asset Management Llc
Royce & Associates
Weiss Peck & Greer
Oberweis Asset Mgmt
American Century Investments
Vanguard Group
Lehman Brothers Asset Mgmt
Northern Trust Co (chicago)
Zweig Dimenna Partners
Highland Capital Mgmt Corp
Fidelity Mgmt & Research Co
Deutsche Asset Mgmt (new York
zeke
I hope they end up nailing these fuckers to a wall and take every penny they've gained from this PR BS and give it back to the company (or better yet, the EFF/OSG/GNU) and then let every pissed off geek take their best shot. Time to dust off the trebuchet for an impressive launch!
Since they are pumping up the stock price with lots of big claims that it will probably be provable they knew were false, in order to sell their stock, will they be the next executives to go to prison?
If so, it couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of &*%$@!
Here's hoping they enjoy having Ken Lay as a cellmate...
"There are laws that enslave men, and laws that set them free. " - Sean Connery as King Arthur
The SCO people are not doing this to make money. They are doing this because Microsoft is strong-arming them to do it. SCO is just the patsy, the fall guy.
If you want to understand what's going on here go watch the Godfather movies.
All us nerds know SCOX will soon go down the toilet I thought for sure I could make a little moolah off of this knowledge. I finally got up the nerve to put my money where my mouth was and ...
SCOX doesn't have options and I was unable to find a brokerage that had (enough) shares to short. I was ready to short 5k+ shares. And it turns out too darn many folks have the same opinion as I do. AND I KNOW IT'S YOU GUYS ;) !!
(If at first you don't succeed, do it different next time!)
from http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/030819/latu060_1.html
/PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- The SCO Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: SCOX - News), the owner of the UNIX(R) operating system, today announced the appointment of Gregory Blepp as vice president of SCOsource. Blepp will report to Chris Sontag, the senior vice president and general manager of SCOsource, the division of SCO tasked with protecting and licensing the company's UNIX intellectual property.(Logo: http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/prnh/19990421/SCOLO GO )
.
SCOsource in Europe
# LINDON, Utah, Aug. 19
Blepp, a former VP of International Business at SuSE, brings to SCO a wealth of experience in marketing and business management from time at Network Associates and Computer Associates. Blepp's appointment is taking place at SCOForum in Las Vegas this week where he is being introduced to SCO partners and resellers.
"We're pleased to have Gregory Blepp join SCO to assist in our efforts around SCOsource in Europe," said Chris Sontag, senior vice president and GM, SCOsource. "We look forward to using Blepp's talents and expertise in assisting the company to properly license SCO's valuable UNIX intellectual property."
About The SCO Group
The SCO Group (Nasdaq: SCOX - News) helps millions of customers in more than 82 countries to grow their businesses with UNIX business solutions. Headquartered in Lindon, Utah, SCO has a worldwide network of more than 11,000 resellers and 4,000 developers. SCO Global Services provides reliable localized support and services to all partners and customers. For more information on SCO products and services visit http://www.sco.com
SCO and the associated SCO logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of The SCO Group, Inc., in the U.S. and other countries. UNIX is a registered trademark of The Open Group in the United States and other countries. All other brand or product names are or may be trademarks of, and are used to identify products or services of, their respective owners.
The plan to sell shares in advance was planned at the same time as the rest of the scam, also in advance. Couldn't this be shown in a criminal trial??
First the email:
Subject: Linux License information request
I am running Red Hat Linux 9.0 on my computer at home. I am a technical trainer, so I also need the commputer for work also.
I am asking how is SCO's license to run Linux on a single processor (Athlon) machine.
I would also like a description of why I have to have a license from SCO to run Linux on my computer.
Here is the repsonse:
Subject: RE: Linux License information request
I am not sure why you are asking us this question, however I contacted SCO on your behalf and this was their reply:
"According to copyright laws, SCO may choose to seek remedies from end-users who are using Linux that contains our source code. By purchasing a license from SCO, users are "made whole" and don't have to worry about infringing on SCO's copyrights."
In a nutshell, SCO source code exists in the Linux operating system and SCO has the right to be paid for their source code.
If you need additional information please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
Clinton A. Pownall Computer Business Consultants, Inc www.computerbusiness.com
You have to learn to read these scox press releases very carefully. For example: scox said they don't plan to sue linux users, then the same day scox said: just because we don't plan to, doesn't mean we won't.
>>the first batch of bills being sent to around 1,000 US users.
Note the wording? "around 1000" that could mean less than 5.
>>is likely to result in legal action, the company warned>"A large number of commercial Linux users could begin receiving [invoices] in the next month or two.
"could begin"
>>"I would say that a batch in the neighbourhood of 1,000 or so would go out." >"Sooner or later the invoicing will reach European companies I'm sure
"sooner or later" = never.
>>Companies that refuse to pay the invoice may need to have this resolved through the courts,
"may need"
Add it all up. Scox is saying exactly nothing. It's all hype. But isn't that the way fud works?
Among other things from my linuxcentral.com order today:
No. Item: Item No. Price Total
1 FreeBSD 5.1 Install L000-164 $2.95 $2.95
Not a flame, but merely a comment. I never really looked into BSD much, as linux was mostly my focus for getting out of NT. If I can get the same degree of functionality without the FUD from BSD, heck, why not do it? Right now I don't have a whole server farm to manage, I just have a couple of boxes. It'll be nice to look at the SCO thing and go "up yours, cunts" to SCO, but still have nothing to worry about even if SCO ends up winning the legal battle.
I still may file a declaratory judgment action against SCO, though.
GF.
Lots of petrified grits
Fuck Dell!!
cruel and unusual punishment.
porky pig and elmer, now that's funny!
-pyrrho
Homer: Do you take checks? ...
SCO: Sure thing.
Homer: Here you go.
SCO: *takes it and proceeds to walk away*
Homer:
*bouncy hand action*
BOI-OING-OING-OING-OING!!!!!!!
SCO: Now why did you do that? Are you implying that the check will bounce?
Homer: Of course not.
SCO: *proceeds to walk away*
Homer: DUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!
SCO: Now why did you say that?
As you are violating the GPL by claiming some of the code you destributed is now covered by your copyright, And as I retain the copyright to a portion of the Linux code you now must license from me, I am submitting this invoice.
:o)
You forgot to add:
"Unfortunately, due to legal concerns, I'm unable to tell you which parts of the kernel include my copyrighted code, but rest assured it is a sizeable number of lines, throughout the entire kernel."
Proving that the idiotic investors from the dot-com era are still lurking around in numbers. Me, I wouldn't bet that IBM will buy SCO and I wouldn't bet that their case has merit either. The grim picture that leaves certainly isn't worth $15 a share. Maybe they're betting on a shareholder suit against the individual board members, but that might pay pennies on the dollar versus what's going into it right now. I just don't get it at all...
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Has anybody done a study comparing membership in NRA with Linux usage? I've noticed there's a fair number of advocates of gun ownership and rights amongst open source advocates. It might make a facinating slashdot poll to assess this overlap of interests! It could be useful information about the Linux 'customer profile'.
When is this damn case getting to court? I'm getting tired of this. Just have the battle, and be done. SCO will lose, is my guess, and we'll all go back to doing what we were doing before. Or IBM will buy them out. Whatever.
That's gotta fit into your schema somewhere
I was looking to see what I could dig up on SCO's website and found this old press release:
9 26 7
http://ir.sco.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=9
Stowell added: "Sooner or later the invoicing will reach European companies I'm sure. We will not be limiting this to a US only market."
This warning seems to be a clear breach of the German injunction.
For that matter, so is the material on SCO's main web page here, which makes the unproven allegation "customers unknowingly received illegal copies of SCO property", among other things. I can't think of any reason why the injunction would be limited to material on the German-language page, which is, after all, also served from the U.S.
Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
even a high school student with only half a semester of "cooperation game law" can show a judge that these people are extorting innocent people to fund their crack habit though a stock scam.
You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
an anonymous reader points out that SCO executives are still selling off their stock. Total proceeds in August of over $600,000. Senior Vice President Reginald Broughton tops the list with over $300,000."
SCO is betting all the cookies. If they lose this, then SCO does the Enron deathdance into oblivion. Couldn't happen to a nicer company with a nicer set of C..a$$holes.. I mean CEOs.
!@#$% whole-grain cereal. When I want fiber, I eat some wicker furniture. - G. Carlin
I have always believed that personal integrity is one of the biggest indicators of likely success. A few years ago that was an unfashionable position to take, today in the wake of Enron, Haliburton, Sunbeam etc. more people seem to take my point of view.
I remember back when the Cantor and Segal thing hit telling Laurence Canter that the Hi Tech industry was a small pond and that most of the people who got rich from it did so by being a part of the right circles, playing the inside game. Few people can have realized the potential of the internet as early as Canter and Segal did and ended up worse off than they started as a result.
I think it will turn out the same way for the SCO folk. It is not like they have skills that are exactly sought after in the Windows world. It is going to be interesting seeing these chuckleheads trying to get jobs at IBM and Red Hat in a years time.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
Go on - don't be a wuss. You can take on more multi-billion dollar companies at once from flimsy legal ground can't you?
Speaking of which, have any SCO investors out there considered the consequences for their stock if SCO is thrown out of court? Does the US legal system allow recovery of legal expenses in this case? And of course there is the counter-suits. If it were my stock I would be dumping it now (let the single scamming backroom dealing investment company hold the risk).
Just my AU$0.04 (damn exchange rates).
Q.
Insert Signature Here
Can you say "mail Fraud"? Why sure! I Just knew you could! Here in Judge Kimball's Neighborhood, the jury just says: "Speedy Delivery!"
Tux Games and Linux Game Publishing are using Linux servers
SCO can bite me as they arent getting a penny from us. I'll spend every penny my companies have to defend our rights under the GPL and run my company into the ground doing it, before I let them have a penny of it.
I call on other Linux companies to make their claim to Linux. Tell SCO that you wont be bullied!
Tux Games. Your complete source for native Linux games.
Explain to me how SCO can charge a licence fee for their code when it's linked to a big chunk of GPL code?
OK, so it may have been ripped off to get it in there. However, that doesn't entitle SCO to ignore the GPL licence on the vast majority of the code in order to charge a licence for their bit.