HP Offers Linux Purchasers Indemnification

PnViking writes points out this story in the Detroit News, writing "HP is now covering any claims from SCO if you bought Linux and have a support contract from them: '"We will provide full indemnity across the entire suite for any SCO-related action," said Martin Fink, HP's vice president of Linux. "If (customers) were to get sued by SCO, we would take over their defense and assume liability on their behalf."'" The catch is, you have to be running it on HP equipment ;)

Comments

Wow

[jdc180]

This is something all the companies should have been doing from the beginning(cough cough)IBM(cough cough). Companies like to have someone to point the finger to if something goes wrong, and HP just painted a huge target on themselves ;-)

IBM?

[bdowne01]

Helloooo... IBM, are you listening??? Wait, wasn't HP the supposed Fourtune 500 company that bought a SCO license?

Re:IBM?

[skroz]

Helloooo... IBM, are you listening??? Wait, wasn't HP the supposed Fourtune 500 company that bought a SCO license?

And you may have just hit the nail right on the head. If HP owns a valid SCO license, and it requires that its customers run an HP provided version of Linux on HP hardware, they may be covered by the license that they own... their customers may already be running a licensed version. So win or lose, HP's customers are covered.

Ok there might be the catch...

[marcello_dl]

... but the overall image of HP should get advantage of this initiative.

I also think that HP doesn't start a campaign like this without being convinced that SCO claims have no ground. I wonder if they discovered something we don't know...

Re:Ok there might be the catch...

[SwellJoe]

I wonder if they discovered something we don't know...

They don't have to know anything we don't know to be confident of the outcome of this debacle. SCO have built a sand castle out of expedient fabrications. Courts have done stupid things in the past, but it would take an exceedingly stupid judge on an exceedingly bad day to look at this and see anything other than the dying litigious gasp of a company taken over by ravening weasels staging an epic pump and dump.

This is such a farcical case, in any reasonable world, the heads of SCO would be in prison by now...And even in this mad world of ours, it isn't unlikely that the SEC will have some words with Darl and company before this is all over.

Drop the act HP

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder why they waited so long, if they really wanted to assure their customers they would taken this step some time ago when SCO FUD was alive and strong. Sounds like a meaning less gesture designed to put them in a better light.

Keep in mind the caveat

[Compact Dick]

You have to be using HP hardware. Fine, at least it demonstrates one avenue how to capitalise on the GPL :-)

Having said that, I expect Big Blue to follow this up with a reversal on their current stance. Having poured in so much money into Linux, it would appear rather hypocritical not to.

Thanks for the best news I've seen here in a while.

Mebbe Carli signed her deal with devil ?

[ehack]

Maybe Carli signed her deal with the devil already ? That would explain why they can be so certain.

This is not the old HP..

[Anonymous Coward]

How much you want to bet HP paid for a "SCO Linux License" so they could "legally" distribute linux.. notice that it HAS to run on HP hardware..

There is still that "unknown" licensee of SCO's supposed linux license..

You can keep your Detroit News

[Kalewa]

I prefer to get my IT news from the Hindustan Times. Seriously though, it has a little more/different information that may be worth checking out.

Let me be the first(?) to say

[eddy]

That this is stupid. Indemnification is a strawman. This is like arguing with it.

HP FUD

[GoofyBoy]

Perhaps HP lawyers just read the news.

SCO has no intention to sue Linux end-users

And there has to be limitations and fineprint to HP offer. No way HP if offer protection from every SCO case out there. Does that mean I can actively steal SCO code and be free of all legal consequences as long as its run on HP hardware?

Re:Good move on HP's part...

[Sevn]

No doubt. Very smart marketing people. The fact that HP did this just made me forget that they recentlylaid off a shitload of people but somehow managed to afford two brand new gulfstream fives that they really needed because their other private jets were 3 YEARS OLD.

Marketing via backlash

[Badgerman]

This thought occurred to me:

• SCO goes after Linux as a marketing/gain money tool.
  
• They get hated.
  
• Opposing SCO becomes popular.
  
• SCO has just handed people a new marketing tool - oppose/stand up to SCO, get attention, customers, etc.
  

Though in reflection, their egregeous approach to an unsubstantiated claim was bound to provoke a backlash. And it was bound to be something that people would take advantage of.

Did SCO even see this? My guess, no. They're up their in their own little world.

You must look for the connection....

[Famatra]

Hewlett Packard was a *member* and *speaker* of SCO Forum 2003:

http://www.caldera.com/2003forum/agenda.html

SCO and HP are friends. I would not be surprised if SCO made a deal with HP to let them off the hook in order for HP to do this little indemnification campaign to sell more of their computers.

What can you do about this? Do not buy HP products, or products from people who deal with SCO.

Effect of Red Hat suit?

[amcguinn]

SCO's desperate pleading in the Red Hat case -- "don't make us defend our FUD in court, we never dreamed of suing Red Hat for merely distributing Linux, they have no reasonable apprehension of being sued." -- will have given HP huge confidence for this move. SCO as good as said "We will make no demands of anyone who has the resources, expertise, and incentive to prove in court that Linux does not infringe our copyrights. We merely intend to shake down those for whom it is cheaper to send us a few thousand dollars than take the effort and risk of opposing us".

If SCO had the guts to take on HP, they would have had the guts to take on Red Hat. In actively running away from Red Hat they have invited this.

Re:Proof

[passthecrackpipe]

dude, where did you get the idea that I think all corporations are evil, and where did you get the idea that am a fanatic? talk about being a quick on the draw when it comes to stereotyping. Sheesh, this place gets to be more like slashdot every day...

Anyway, you miss the point - I feel they should not get on the whole indemnification bandwagon in the first place. It is a red herring - a scam put in place by SCO, and HP are simply giving the whole crazy "indemnification" story more credibility by pulling what are essentially empty, tacky marketing stunts like this. This is doing Linux adoption more harm then good. If you think I am wrong, please take a moment, and ask yourself why companies should be deploying linux in the first place.

Re:Proof

[Mostly a lurker]

OK, I think I understand your viewpoint. I disagree that it lends credibility: big companies do not freely assume legal responsibility in cases where they fear losing. IMHO, the PHBs will tend to be reassured by being told that HP will assume the legal risk. Perhaps it does make HP look a little tacky though: after all, they are doing something very similar to what Microsoft did a few weeks back (indemnifying customers against 3rd party license actions) and I find most things Microsoft does tacky!

SCO's weakest yet

[amcguinn]

To many readers of /., SCO's claim that this strengthens their argument seems more plausible than their earlier gibberish over Linux.

Fear not.

On the history of UNIX and on the details of intellectual property law, the average Nasdaq investor is less knowledgable than the average slashdotter.

But on the mechanics of business disputes and the running of companies, they are more knowledgable. They are not idiots, and they will interpret this as "HP's lawyers have spent a lot of time looking at this, and HP are betting BIG MONEY that SCO are full of shit."