Slashdot Mirror


More on SCO Code Snippets

anoopsinha writes "A story in linuxworld reports that SCO itself has no idea what the history of a particular snippet of code might be - even a high profile snippet like the one SCO highlighted at SCO Forum. Having no idea if its claims have merit has not stopped SCO so far, so we can expect more from SCO along the lines of big claims with no merit."

8 of 339 comments (clear)

  1. Doesn't matter by Locky · · Score: 5, Funny

    Seems to me like they can get away with showing greek code anyway.

    1. Re:Doesn't matter by Sir+Pallas · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's all Greek to them.

    2. Re:Doesn't matter by Lonath · · Score: 4, Funny

      I invision that building being a bunch of yes men and raid attack lawers who have the combigned morals of Stalin, Goering, and Ghengis Kahn all rolled up into one.

      Finally. I invoke Godwin's Law. Now we can dispense with the SCO stories since no useful further debate is possible.

  2. Summary of SCO IP claims by Empiric · · Score: 5, Funny

    "So, you see... we're associated with a Unix, and, you're associated with a Unix... well, you're financial obligations here should be obvious."

    --
    ~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
  3. In other news by RinzeWind · · Score: 5, Funny

    SCO claims Gibraltar.

  4. Re:Why not use linguists? by G3ckoG33k · · Score: 4, Funny

    Had you been a cunning linguist, she may had.

  5. Re:Now... by Unoriginal+Nick · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now might be a good time to not take investmest advice from a stranger on a website.

  6. Baghdad McBride does it again. by rice_burners_suck · · Score: 5, Funny
    SCO cannot get away with this bull. SCO will not get away with this bull.

    The question of code history is one I asked a *long* time ago; probably the first I heard of this SCO bs. I believe they wrote a little C program that crawls the source tree and looks for similar lines of code. Hell, I could write a program like that, make it compare two source trees that make up 10,000 lines of code, and have it print out that 1,000,000 of those 10,000 lines are identical. Just like the ad for PC-Lint in the programming magazines.

    Darl McBride's silly little company is acting just like the idiot who was sitting in a cafe one day. When the waitress came to take his order, the man asked her to sign and date some official documents certifying that he had been in that cafe at that time and date, with records of what he ordered, how long he stayed, etc. The waitress was confused about this, but the man claimed that he was very paranoid of someday being framed of a crime, and therefore wanted a written alibi for every waking moment of his life. He shows the waitress a calendar book with exact notations of every step he had ever taken. Suddenly, the police storms into the establishment and asks the gentleman if he goes by such and such a name. He answers affirmatively. They asked him if he had been involved in a jewelry store robbery which took place at 1221 East West Street several nights prior, at 12:31 AM. As he had proof of everything he had ever done, he opened his book, flipped to the day and hour in question, and read aloud from his book, "Jewelry store robbery at 1221 East West Street, 12:31 AM." Before he realized what a stupid error he had made, the police snatched him and he was off to jail.

    With that in mind, here is an open letter to SCO CEO Darl McBride:

    Dear Darl,

    I do not believe any of your company's claims. In fact, I believe quite the opposite: I believe that SCO's software is composed 100% of code your company deliberately stole from other companies. Because your company stole code from the Linux kernel, you later found that code and wrongly believe that the theft occured in the other direction. Further, I strongly believe that with your company's shoddy record keeping, you cannot prove the origin of your code, so it is therefore impossible to prove your false claims of its being misappropriated into Linux. I further believe that even if your company could produce such proof, the effects of doing so would be adverse for you, as the records would clearly indicate the thefts that SCO deliberately performed.

    Oh yeah, and one other thing: In your poorly written, grammatically incorrect, misspelled "open letter" to the free software community, you deliberately took some quotes out of context. This was silly because the misquoted documents are readily available for all to see your blatent and stupid attempt. To demonstrate the effect of misquoting, I offer the following text, quoted directly from your letter:

    My company, the SCO Group ... illegally copied ... the free Linux operating system. In doing this we ... adversely affect the ... credibility of ... SCO. SCO ... violates ... Linux ... intellectual property rights. This is improper. SCO ... has forfeited its rights to this code. SCO ... copyright ownership ... is null and void. SCO ... needs a business model that is sustainable, if it is to grow beyond a part-time avocation into an enterprise-trusted development model. Rather than fight for the right for free software ... I invite the Open Source community to ... fire off a "rant" ... across a negotiation table. [R]espect for intellectual property is not [an option]...

    Best regards to all,

    Darl McBride
    CEO
    The SCO Group

    How does that feel, Darl?

    Sincerely,

    rice burners suck
    Chief Karma Whore
    Slashdot