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."
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.
lots of companies don't pay invoices unless they quote a purchase order number which matches the invoiced amount to within 5%
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!
Have a look at their total holdings, HUNSAKER, JEFF F. Vice President will be cashed out completely in 1-2 months at current rate. Even the larger holders at the current rate will be cashed out in a year.
James
...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
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
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,
That would be wonderful, but is, of course purely speculative.
Many have said that SCO picked the wrong company to start this little fiaSCO with, and this might show exactly why.
Given the nature of the IBM legal team, it's possible that they're not just going to remove SCO from threatening Linux and AIX (and by extention a major slice of IBMs business future) but the people pulling SCOs strings.
BTW, that should be Ralph J. Yarro, I think. Do a google search on Ralph J. Yarro - the first page is almost all links to "insider trading" going on not only SCO, but Altiris as well.
Soko
"Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm." - Anonymous
Dell offers no protection for systems with Windows installed.
Microsoft does not offer protection for systems with Windows installed.
Apple offers no protection for people with OS/X installed.
Sun offers no protection for people with Solaris installed.
Do we see a patern here?
Heck if your new car's brakes fail and you crash into a bus of Nuns takinq orphans to a puppy farm do you think the car company will offer indemification? Heck no.
No large company on the face of this earth will indemify another company. Large companies understand this. It is just the press and normal people that do not. If a large customer of Dell's gets sued by SCO then they will try and entagle Dell in the suit or if they loose, sue Dell.
It is not Dells fault. SCO is using the scumbag tactic of going after the small fry hoping to scare them into giving them money. Even if SCO looses they will not refund their money! Why doesn't SCO sue Dell for selling Linux, or SuSE, or SUN... Wait Sun is going to release a version of Linux SCO says SUN in not indanger of a law suite since they have the rights to redistribute Unix. So if SUN which is safe releases a Linux Distro under GPL then...
1. All the Linux code that SUN releases is now SCO safe under GPL with SCO's blessing
OR
2. SUN is breaking their agreement with SCO and releasing SCO's IP under GPL with full knowlage that they are doing so. So they should be added to the law suite ASAP. In fact if SCO does not add them then they could be considered to be giving permison to release the code as GPL.
OR
3. Sun is breaking the GPL and needs to be sued.
This could be interesting.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
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.
Actually, it does matter. Because if you invoice over a good/service that you didn't provide, but you are claiming that you DID, that is fraud, which is a federal offence. If a judge rules that there is SCO code in Linux, AND that Linux users have to pay, then all is good for SCO. But if the judge determines that there ISN'T any code, or that users don't have to pay, then SCO could very well get charged with one count of fraud for every invoice they sent.
At least, that is MY understanding of fraud. IANALASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
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.
Essentially, sending a fraudulant invoice through the US mails is a crime
And no, ignorance of the law is not a valid defense. So even if SCO thought they were in the right sending these invoices, they can be busted for fraud. (Just like they're trying to bust Linux users who never intended on infringing SCO's alleged copyright).
$8.95/mo web hosting
The ocean parts and the meteors come down
Laid out in amber, baby.
I thought SCO are argueing that the GPL is invalid and that all GPL code is public domain ...
;) ), in suing someone for using code from public domain? That would also mean anything they do is also public domain. I seriously doubt that that is what they are intending by claiming GPL to be invalid. Probably more like all GPL code is copyrighted and thus NOT in public domain. I could be wrong.
o.O Then.. how would SCO have any reason, or hell validity (hold off the obviousness of that
.unsigged
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/