HP Offers Linux Purchasers Indemnification

Proof by artios · 2003-09-24 00:19 · Score: 5, Insightful

Now that is what we call good solid evidence (as if we didn't have enough) that SCO is pulling stuff out of it's royal... A big company like HP, doesn't just all of a sudden decide it's going to defend against a lost case.

--
Free Ipod here

Re:Proof by AlricTheMad · 2003-09-24 00:21 · Score: 5, Insightful

Actually I would wager that they are covering thier bottom line.
Tough for them to sell HP Hardware and Linux solutions if buys are worried about getting sued if they do buy.

AlricTheMad
Re:Proof by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-24 00:25 · Score: 5, Insightful

I'd say there's bits of both in there. They're certainly mentioning it publicly as a marketing thing. "we'll cover you, that's a HP advantage" etc.

It's a risk/benefit thing. HP get the benefit of the world knowing they're covered under HP. HP know the risk SCO's claims mean anything is less than that benefit.
Re:Proof by passthecrackpipe · 2003-09-24 00:48 · Score: 5, Informative

Proof of the fact that all commercial players are using scare tactics to sell kit, that is. Those vendors that offer "indemnification" provided you use their hardware or whatever catch there is, are just as bad as SCO.

Vendors are slowly realising that customers are increasingly clued-up about where, how, and on what they spend their money. I was with a customer recently that had been badgered and hammered around by Sun to upgrade their systems. The customer saw no good reason to do so, and subsequently, Sun came around to provide a "free systems review", with a resulting verdict that the software and (SPARC) hardware was out of date. The customer agreed about the software part, and deployed Linux across the ageing SPARC estate. The stuff is now faster, better, and easier to manage, and they recon they a have a few more years of life out of those systems.

Sun turned around and claimed that the systems are now unsupported - not a big deal, customer said. if it breaks we will buy new (Intel.... hehe). Sun then turned around and went to the CEO and the legal department, talking about indemnification, SCO, courtcases and the world coming to an end. Luckily, the customer was not fazed, and Sun lost a *lot* of goodwill in that place. However, other customers will be scared and bullied into going along.

If they only way you can flog your hardware is by using scare tactics, then you are *really* selling a pile of crap.....

--
People who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.
Re:Proof by Mostly+a+lurker · 2003-09-24 01:07 · Score: 4, Insightful

Your Sun story is a classic!
However, I see nothing unreasonable about HP's position that they will indemnify only their own customers. What are they supposed to do: provide a contact e-mail address for free legal assistance, to be used by people who have downloaded Mandrake to run on their IBM PC and then subsequently received a threatening letter from SCO?
Re:Proof by Zak3056 · 2003-09-24 01:12 · Score: 5, Insightful

Proof of the fact that all commercial players are using scare tactics to sell kit, that is. Those vendors that offer "indemnification" provided you use their hardware or whatever catch there is, are just as bad as SCO

Err... what exactly are you looking for HP to do? Indemnify EVERYONE who runs linux?

Of COURSE they're limiting this to people who have HP hardware--thats what makes them HP customers!

--
What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard to understand?
Re:Proof by junelson · 2003-09-24 01:13 · Score: 4, Insightful

How is this a negative? HP is stepping forward and resolving any customer concerns about running linux on HP systems. The more companies that follow suit, the less revenue SCO will be able to generate from linux licensing fees. And publicly it makes it clear that HP does not think SCO has a case.

Comparing HP to SCO is ridiculous. Would you have them assume responsibility for every linux user? No CFO in their right mind would assume that risk for no possible return. Put aside your "all corporations are evil" fanaticism and see this for what it is - a positive move by a large equipment vendor that will help dismiss the scare tactics taken by SCO.
Re:Proof by WCMI92 · 2003-09-24 02:34 · Score: 3, Insightful

"well, I am not stating that HP should indemnify everyone, i am saying they should not get on the indemnification bandwagon in the first place. It lends cedibility to what is for all intents and purposes a scam to begin with. It also makes HP look tacky"

How? HP is more or less defending EVERYONE by doing this. Anything gleaned from one suit can be used by all...

I suspect that if SCO finds some end user who doesn't have the funds to defend himself, the Red Hat fund, and others will step up to the plate.

Besides, the chances of SCO filing suits against end users is nil right now. It's all a threat that makes great FUD for their Microsoft and Sun masters...

SCO doesn't have the money to file lawsuits like the RIAA does, in many jurisdictions, and to defend themselves against the counterclaims.

They also can't risk one of these suits coming to an actual TRIAL either, especially before the IBM suit is heard (and disposed of).

SCO's threats are total vaporware. Their ROI value to their MS and Sun investors is to keep the PERCEPTION of threat as high and continual as long as possible.

--
Corporatism != Free Market

Finally! by scsirob · 2003-09-24 00:20 · Score: 4, Insightful

This is a good sign. I bet HP wouldn't do this without their lawyers being absolutely certain they have nothing to fear. Their conclusion must be the same as ours...

--
To Terminate, or not to Terminate, that's the question - SCSIROB

IBM? by bdowne01 · 2003-09-24 00:20 · Score: 4, Interesting

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

--
-brain

Reinsured by pork_spies · 2003-09-24 00:20 · Score: 4, Insightful

Presumably HP are doing this because they can now lay off the risk with an insuring for a low enough price to make it worthwhile. So this doesn't just mean HP are slam dunking SCO, but others - who have no direct IT interests - are doing it too. We are winning.

Re:Reinsured by KillerLoop · 2003-09-24 00:44 · Score: 5, Insightful

I'm afraid we are losing.

Color me paranoid, but maybe this was just some targeting practice at hurting Linux through the legal system. Up till now it was a roaring success. It stirred up a lot of fuss, and some are putting Linux on hold until the matter is resolved. Not a small feat for an obvious non-issue like the SCO claim.

Just keep on bombarding the community with stuff like that, and Linux will get tainted with "perennial legal problems". A library here, some kernel code there... and even if every single one of the accusations turns out to be utter bullshit, many people may get the impression that it's only a matter of time until one of the claims hits home and they get hurt.
Re:Reinsured by Jerry · 2003-09-24 01:04 · Score: 4, Insightful

I'm afraid we are losing.

I'm afraid you are wrong.

Linux will get tainted with "perennial legal problems".

That would be true only if people suspected that SCO had some justification and a chance to win their suit. The way it's turned out (past tense) McBride shot his mouth off one too many times and now people see him as merely bombastic. The big turn-a-round came when he showed 'infringed code' at his not so big West Coast affair last month, and it was quickly shown to be BSD-type legacy code. Combine that with legal-types stepping into the fray with analyses of SCO's chances of proving their claims and you have a complete route. With SCO being counter-sued for IP theft they don't have enough money in their coffers (nor in the Canopy Group coffers) to sustain a legal battle against the charges, and they've exhausted all takers for their bogus Unix 'license'. MS and Sun can only do that once, and no one else is interested.

The only other group of people who 'think' SCO has a chance are those dedicated Microsurfties who push MS PR for personal profit while claiming to be unbiased 'analysts'.

HP came out with this PR tactic because they know the battle is over and SCO has lost. Watch other companies take the same pledge in order to keep their Linux market alive.

--
Running with Linux for over 20 years!
Re:Reinsured by theflea · 2003-09-24 01:17 · Score: 4, Insightful

I also cringe when I see linux's reputation tarnished, and so much FUD being passed around, but there's a flip side to the legal challenges.

If the GPL and Linux can withstand the next few years in court, a new image might emerge. People might look at linux as "the OS everyone tried to kill, but couldn't".

With so many twists and turns recently, I wouldn't dare predict what will happen, but I am generally optimistic.

Oh, and the HP thing? It's like selling meteor strike insurance to all my friends & acquaintances. I mean, there is a chance that SCO could successfully sue a corporate linux user, but a very small one. Plus, didn't SCO say HP wasn't a target on their radar screen because HP UX was a properly licensed unix from way back?

Good move on HP's part... by Bvardi · 2003-09-24 00:21 · Score: 4, Insightful

They're going to get some good press out of this, pick up some new customers (especially on the corporate side) and at the same time generate some goodwill for themselves.

AND at the same time they likely won't have to invest much in legal work - SCO doesn't really have a case (as has been demonstrated) and doesn't have the money to take on another big lawsuit anyways (think they would go after HP while the redhat/ibm lawsuits are out there? Not likely... their warchest has to be getting a bit less weighty these days)

Re:Good move on HP's part... by Sevn · 2003-09-24 00:47 · Score: 5, Interesting

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.

--
For every annoying gentoo user, are three even more annoying anti-gentoo crybabies. Take Yosh from #Gimp for example.
Re:Good move on HP's part... by Ngwenya · 2003-09-24 04:24 · Score: 4, Insightful

ObDisclaimer: I work for HP, but this is a purely personal statement. HP's got nothing to do with it - in fact HP's attitude is made explicit from Martin's statement - it's for the courts to decide SCO's claims. HP will not prejudge the courts, but HP explicitly does not acknowledge the claim.
SCO would have spun this anyway they want. If HP didn't offer indemnity for this vacuous case, then SCO claims HP is running scared of the court action and is letting its users hang in the wind.
If, on the other hand, indemnification is offered, then HP lends validity to SCO's claim.
In other words:
HP: We don't assign any validity to this case.
SCO: Aha! So you admit that there is a case. Hey everyone, HP says there is a case! Y'hear - HP says SCO will win its case!.
Sorry, but these guys are in spin overdrive; they can't even tell truth from lies any more.
--Ng

Re:Wow by Boiler99 · 2003-09-24 00:24 · Score: 5, Insightful

About that target though...HP has been respected in the business information services industry for quite some time (although merging with Compaq perhaps tarnished that, but hey that's another story ;) So really, companies who are not so familiar with SCO other than their recent run of litigations will see the lawsuit as more frivolous, and start to ignore it more and more.

Really, the greatest side effect of major players lining up against SCO is that it will help undo the bad rep SCO gave Linux with the PHB's who don't know anything about tech other than what they see in the Wall Street Journal.

Competitive Wager... by SwansonMarpalum · 2003-09-24 00:24 · Score: 5, Insightful

It's entirely possible that HP is making a calculated gamble that they can steal IBM's potential Linux customers out from under them by offering indemnification, even if they aren't 100% sure they have a defensible position.

Of course this brings up the point I was discussing with a friend of mine the other day: SCO's entire case for licensing binary versions of portions of the Linux kernel relies on forgiving them for ignorantly distributing these portions under the GPL. If such a courtesy is extended to SCO due to their ignorance, I doubt it would be denied to customers who were ignorantly violating SCO Group's so called intellectual property.

--
"Give away the stone, let the oceans take and transmutate this cold and faded anchor." - Maynard James Keenan

This is not the old HP.. by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-24 00:28 · Score: 4, Interesting

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..

The quicker this get to court the better. by gsdali · 2003-09-24 00:29 · Score: 3, Insightful

This decision will hopefully manoeuvre SCO into the courtroom (or into shutting up) and finally being forced to tell people what IP has been infringed, if any.

You can keep your Detroit News by Kalewa · 2003-09-24 00:29 · Score: 3, Interesting

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.

This explains the drop in stock price by budGibson · 2003-09-24 00:30 · Score: 5, Informative

SCO's stock price took a little 5% dive at the end of the day yesterday. This must have been the news.

It only makes sense for systems integrators like HP and IBM to support Linux. They are providing a service in putting their systems together and want to catch as much of the value-add as possible. Paying a rent to Microsoft detracts from that.

Catch?? What catch? by goldspider · 2003-09-24 00:36 · Score: 4, Insightful

"The catch is, you have to be running it on HP equipment ;)"

Perhaps my coffee hasn't kicked in yet, but why would anyone believe that HP would assume liability for people who may not even be customers? If they're going to be doing your company this favor, shouldn't it at least prove it's an HP customer? That seems pretty reasonable to me!

--
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy

Variety is the spice of life by GoofyBoy · 2003-09-24 00:36 · Score: 3, Funny

A /. article about SCO first thing in the morning? What a welcome change!

--
The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.

It is doubtful that HP licensed from SCO by brokeninside · 2003-09-24 00:37 · Score: 3, Informative

The article cleary states that HP did not license Linux from SCO.

"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 indemnification program is limited to customers who receive a Linux distribution from HP, run it on HP hardware and have a support contract with HP. There's no additional charge for the protection.
Fink said HP is not paying any Linux-related licensing fees to SCO. "HP is not acknowledging anything related to SCO's actions," he said. "The validity of that is for the courts to decide."

Good for HP but ....... by holy_fire · 2003-09-24 00:39 · Score: 4, Insightful

This may a good move for HP to attract or steal customers but I'm not sure if this is good for Linux as a whole.

First this may strengthen and not weaken SCO's claims ("If SCO is wrong as anybody claims why do they offer me indemnification?")

Second I think that smaller companies have a harder sell now to bring Linux to customers since they don't have the deep pockets to give the same indemnifications for their customers.
If you can only sell Linux with an indemnification program only the Big Boys can do it and that is not something I want to see.

--
bye, Chris

Re:Good for HP but ....... by Mostly+a+lurker · 2003-09-24 01:25 · Score: 4, Insightful

First this may strengthen and not weaken SCO's claims ("If SCO is wrong as anybody claims why do they offer me indemnification?")
Sorry, but this is totally incomprehensible to me. How can HP saying "we are sufficiently confident of the weakness of SCO's case that we are willing to assume the supposed liability for free" possibly strengthen SCO's case?

HP FUD by GoofyBoy · 2003-09-24 00:45 · Score: 3, Interesting

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?

--
The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.

Re:HP FUD by nyquility · 2003-09-24 01:08 · Score: 4, Informative

Sorry, as much as FUD may be a motor of this as far as HP is concerned I have to wham you with a big, fat RTFA(s).
The HP piece clearly lays out the extent of indemnity HP is giving its (hopefully) valued customers, I really doubt they would be slipshod or stupid enough to "fineprint" their customers into a lawsuit. They would probably just rely on the OSS community rectifying any violating code as soon as it is shown to them.
The piece on SCO not sueing is full to the brim of hypocritical statements by SCO execs and lawyers which show that they may or may not sue, probably depending on how many of gullible Companies fall for their $699 invoice.

Let's not forget... by RoLi · 2003-09-24 00:55 · Score: 4, Insightful

... that SCO so far didn't dare to sue anybody for using Linux.

They did sue IBM for violating "their" IP which has nothing to do with Linux or the GPL.

Marketing via backlash by Badgerman · 2003-09-24 01:00 · Score: 3, Interesting

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.

--
"The Sage treasures Unity and measures all things by it" - Lao Tzu

Yeah, SCO's word means a lot by roystgnr · 2003-09-24 01:27 · Score: 4, Insightful

SCO has no intention to sue Linux end-users

Originally, SCO had no intention of suing anyone at all:
According to McBride, "obviously Linux owes its heritage to UNIX, but not its code. We would not, nor will not, make such a claim."

But at the beginning of August:
"The legal liability for Linux clearly rests with the end user."

"We have the ability to go to users with lawsuits and we will if we have to."

McBride and company have never kept their story straight in the past - expecting them to do so now that they've made another statement we like would probably be overly optimistic.

Nope, it was SUN. by k98sven · 2003-09-24 03:57 · Score: 3, Informative

Wait, wasn't HP the supposed Fourtune 500 company that bought a SCO license?

No.. Although it was speculated at the time. Also, HP was an original sponsor of the SCO users conference, but pulled out.

The latest 10-Q quarterly report from SCO makes it clear that Sun was the other licensee:

We initiated the SCOsource effort to review the status of these existing licensing and sublicensing agreements and to identify others in the industry that may be currently using our intellectual property without obtaining the necessary licenses. This effort resulted in the execution of two license agreements during the April 30, 2003 quarter. The first of these licenses was with Sun Microsystems, Inc. ("Sun"), a long-time licensee of the UNIX source code and a major participant in the UNIX industry, and was a "clean-up" license to cover items that were outside the scope of Sun's initial UNIX license. The second license was to Microsoft Corporation ("Microsoft")"

Slashdot Mirror

HP Offers Linux Purchasers Indemnification

34 of 326 comments (clear)