SCO Derides GPL, Will Revoke SGI's UNIX License

ComaVN writes "Not a big surprise for those who have followed the recent SCO misery, but SCO is going after SGI. According to SGI, SCO intends to terminate their Unix System V license, much like they did with IBM earlier. I guess it's hard to stop once you've chosen a certain direction for your company." sheddd writes "Does this case have any merit? Joe Formage has written a good article on SCO's strange behavior." Read on below for SCO's odd tactic of attacking the GPL by belittling IBM's legal diligence in not avoiding GPL'd software, and word on why Linux users aren't being served SCO invoices.

larry2k writes "PR newswire has an open letter from SCO to IBM.

From the letter: 'SCO believes that the GPL -- created by the Free Software Foundation to supplant current U.S. copyright laws -- is a shaky foundation on which to build a legal case.'" The release is also carried by NewsForge. Among other things, SCO says "By so strongly defending the controversial GPL, IBM is also defending a questionable licensing scheme through which it can avoid providing software indemnification for its customers."

Doesn't supplant mean "replace"? That's not what the GPL does.

And if you're wondering why you have not received an invoice from SCO for any Linux-based OS you may be running, benploni writes "From Groklaw: In this Detroit News story Blake Stowell explains why no one has received an invoice: 'SCO in August said Linux users could avoid lawsuits by paying a one-time fee of $699. The fee will rise to $1,399 on Oct. 15. Since the response to its appeal was adequate, SCO didn't send bills to thousands of Linux users, company spokesman Blake Stowell said.' [emphasis added]. We all knew there was no way they'd risk actually sending out invoices, and here's the proof."

Comments

so then the doctor says

[Anonymous Coward]

h to the goatse
c to the tubgirl
who reads this anymore?

Who's hotter?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ashleigh or Molly from Joe Schmo?

Molly's bod is super smoking, but overall, I think I'd prefer Ashleigh.

Yowsa!

Re:SCO vs 12 year old girls

[Atario]

Give it time.

fp NIGGERS

[Anonymous Coward]

all you blacks can suck it
luda!

Re:fp NIGGERS

[Perlguy]

Of course the person who posted a comment like this is an "Anonymous Coward" - that sums it up nicely.

I'd like to apologize on behalf of the rest of humanity that does not agree with idiots like this...

Re:fp NIGGERS

[TheShadow]

Why apologize? The rest of humanity didn't make that comment. Anyone with half a brain knows that most people are not racist.

Re:fp N*

[Sir Pallas]

This is why we have things like moderation on /.

Re:fp N******

[Anonymous Coward]

I for one welcome our new n-word overlords...

Re: Stock?

[black mariah]

Figures I just ran out of mod points. :(

Re:Stock?

[El]

Uh, the 2-year old survived for 3 weeks by eating dry pasta, mustard and ketchup until her father demanded entry into the apartment. Yes, it was extremely upsetting to me too, as I have a 2-year old. And I do hope my 2-year is as well-equipped to survive.

Re:Stock?

[redfenix]

I'm not worried, my 2-year old tries to get into the kitchen cabinets all the time. =)

Re:Stock?

[fishbowl]

"we have a story of a lady leaving a 2-year old in her apartment for days while she was in jail, never mentioned to the cops that a child was left home alone!"

I don't know where you're getting the "never mentioned" part, other than by inference from the reports.

I hope for the sake of the authorities that they have a record of an interrogation where they asked her specifically if she had any children, etc. Because if she did try to mention this and the authorities ignored it, the consequences would be dire if there was any justice.

Doesn't help a bit that this is a black woman in Florida, and surpise, the father is suddenly some kind of saintly hero?

If you've been arrested, you know there's damned little opportunity to explain how your detention constitutes a life or death situation for anyone or anything outside the jail. More likely they'll say "you had your phone call, you should have used it to call someone to take care of your baby."

She is doing the right thing by keeping her mouth shut now. If she gets a hearing, and waits until then to explain how she tried desperately to tell the police, jailers, other inmates, her court appointed lawyer, etc., how there was this child alone... and explains to the jury how these heartless (racist!) people ignored her... Get a white jury to decide against her and watch for coast-to-coast riots maybe.

You're only getting one side of the story, the "father" together with the "State". You haven't heard a word from the mother (as it should be... she needs to keep her mouth SHUT, but she needs some publicity on her hearing.)