Slashdot Mirror
McBride Interview from Utah SCO Protest
Andrew McNabb writes "Some of you may remember the protest we had in June in front of the SCO offices in Lindon, UT. Afterwards we had an interview with Darl McBride, where he said some very interesting things. More on the scoop, including a transcript and ogg of the discussion is available at Groklaw."
Can't say that I remember it. Sorry.
Umm..no. I doubt anybody here or the non-smelly geeks would have remembered it.
or at least it was last time. mirror of article
When Darl says "So, if we turned around and opened this code up, like if I showed you the code, I mean, I've got it right here. . ..... I'm not going to show you."
This just show me that he is one of those guys that as a kid went around saying "Betcha can't guess what I'm thinking". Those kids used to get beat up or totally ignored. Hmmmm maybe that is the problem we are having today.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
I know Ogg is cool and all, but like most slashdotters, I'm here while wasting time at work..where I'm stuck with NT4 and Media Player 6.5..so an mp3 would be great !
The biggest mistake Boies made was to continue letting McBride et al to continue to speak publicly. So much of what they have said is now coming back to haunt them, especially in the Red Hat case.
It seems pretty obvious that McBride can stall this through his 4 quarters of profit, but his big payoff comes one year after that - I wonder what tricks he has up his sleeve to hang on that long?
For Media Player, Here. Also, plenty of third party players like Winamp and Foobar play ogg.
Why SCO Started All This. No. Really.
.ogg files, here. There are a couple of places where the sound isn't clear, so I've indicated that in the transcript.
.
Friday, October 10 2003 @ 10:18 PM EDT
Back in June, there was a protest by Linux users at SCO headquarters, which received some coverage in the press, including here on Groklaw. I now have a transcript of the conversation between SCO CEO Darl McBride and the protesters. I've also listened to the tape to verify the accuracy of the transcript, and you can do the same if you can play
McBride talks about a number of issues, such as SGI, whether SCO intended to sue end users or commercial only, how and when they discovered the alleged "infringement", Caldera's contributions to Linux, and whether Debian is a safe version of GNU/Linux to use because of its noncommercial nature. He also tells them that SCO isn't interested in suing individual users or even small commercial users. Its beef, he says, is with the "Unix vendor community", UNIX-licensing companies switching to Linux and donating code to Linux so they don't have to pay any more royalties to SCO for Unix code, "the vendors that are getting an economic incentive to reducing the amount of royalties that they pay by virtue of taking our property and putting it into Linux, then turn around and saying it's a free system." He mentions that they were talking about 64-way systems, not home users.
He also says they found "hundreds of thousands of lines of code that are infringing against our contracts." Note the plural on contracts. He claims the increase in functionality in Linux is because of "vendors" that SCO has "confidentiality agreements" with. Again, note the plural.
A lot has changed since June, but it's clear that when this began, SCO had in mind a very small pool of targets, UNIX vendors being a small group of companies. What stands out is that I think you'll see how polite the Linux group is, how friendly the conversation was even when strong points were being made by each side, McBride praising them several times and at the end thanking them for their input and calling them "awesome". How different this reality is from the ugly portrait he has tried to paint in the media of users of GNU/Linux software allegedly "attacking" SCO. And when you hear or read it, ask yourself, how accurate were news reports of this event? But judge for yourself and draw your own conclusions.
Transcript of informal group chit-chat with Darl McBride
June 20, 2003
Members of the Provo Linux Users Group (PLUG), along with other Linux and Unix group members and concerned individuals in the area held a protest against SCO on June 20, 2003. This protest began in front of SCO headquarters in the afternoon. The official PLUG protest web site, with pictures and video, can be seen at http://mirror.lug-nut.com/
After protesting in front of the SCO corporate offices (on a cul-de-sac), many in the group moved to a more visible location, a busy intersection nearby. A little while later, Darl McBride stopped by for an informal chit-chat with the demonstrators on his way home. Here is what was said during the 23-minute conversation.
The Cast:
Darl: SCO CEO Darl McBride
P: Protester (the collective group, with various individuals asking questions)
C: Cameraman
Pleasant Grove Police Officer: Pleasant Grove Police Officer
Darl: So, how's the day going?
P: Oh, pretty well. We had more people than we expected. We talked to some of your engineers outside, and they're really nice people.
Darl(0:11): So how did all that go?
P: Oh, really well . .
Darl(0:16): So you guys are just convinced that we're Satanic? Is that it?
P: No, no, no.
P: Just greedy, that's all.
P: We wouldn't use those words. We would use different ones.
P: We don't say Satanic, but we don't respect what's happening.
P: Yeah, I mean, we obviously don't know what's going
I have over 70 freaks, do you?
McBride talks about a number of issues, such as SGI, whether SCOintended to sue end users or commercial only, how and when theydiscovered the alleged "infringement", Caldera's contributions to Linux, and whether Debian is a safeversion of GNU/Linux to use because of its noncommercial nature. He also tells them that SCO isn't interested in suing individual users or even small commercial users. Its beef, he says, is with the "Unix vendor community", UNIX-licensing companies switching to Linux and donating code to Linux so they don't have to pay any more royalties to SCO for Unix code, "the vendors that are getting aneconomic incentive to reducing the amount of royalties that they payby virtue of taking our property and putting it into Linux, then turnaround and saying it's a free system." He mentions that they were talking about 64-way systems, not home users.
He also says they found "hundreds of thousands of lines of code that are infringing against our contracts." Note the plural on contracts. He claims the increase in functionality in Linux is because of "vendors" that SCO has "confidentiality agreements" with. Again, note the plural.
A lot has changed since June, but it's clear that when this began, SCO had in mind a very small pool of targets, UNIX vendors being a small group of companies. What stands out is that I think you'll see how polite the Linux group is,how friendly the conversation was even when strong points were being made by each side, McBride praising them several times and at the end thanking them for their input and calling them "awesome". How different this reality is from the ugly portrait he has tried topaint in the media of users of GNU/Linux software allegedly "attacking" SCO. And when you hear or read it, ask yourself, how accurate were news reports of this event? But judge for yourself and draw your own conclusions.
Transcriptof informal group chit-chat with Darl McBride
June20, 2003
Members of the Provo LinuxUsers Group (PLUG), along with other Linux and Unix group members andconcerned individuals in the area held a protest against SCO on June20, 2003. This protest began in front of SCO headquarters in theafternoon. The officialPLUG protest web site, with pictures and video, can be seen at http://mirror.lug-nut.com/
After protesting in frontof the SCO corporate offices (on a cul-de-sac), many in the groupmoved to a more visible location, a busy intersection nearby. Alittle while later, Darl McBride stopped by for an informal chit-chatwith the demonstrators on his way home. Here is what was said during the 23-minute conversation.
TheCast:
Darl: SCO CEO Darl McBride
P: Protester (thecollective group, with various individuals asking questions)
C: Cameraman
Pleasant Grove PoliceOfficer: Pleasant Grove Police Officer
Darl: So, how's theday going?
P: Oh, pretty well. We had more people than we expected. We talked to some of yourengineers outside, and they're really nice people.
Darl(0:11): So howdid all that go?
P: Oh, really well . . .
Darl(0:16): So youguys are just convinced that we're Satanic? Is that it?
P: No, no, no.
P: Just greedy,that's all.
P: We wouldn't usethose words. We would use different ones.
P:
karma whore
karma whore
Why mod parent down? He provided the article text, which is useful, and prevents yet more servers being Slashdotted and wasting their money.
Is this an unedited version of the transcript? Wow, if so, reading through the transcript, it appears Darl is not a very good spokesman for the company. He completely lost the initiative with the debate, has no real direction with which to respond to questions. On the other hand, not to defend SCO or anything, but the interviewer does things that always piss me off in interviews. Namely interrupting and quickly changing the subject before the interviewed gets a chance to adequately respond.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
But the story of the interview was posted to slashdot when it happened. Are we all in such a state of SCO withdrawl that we need deliberate dupes.
Yes Darl said stupid things thats probably why sco is no longer saying much.
honestly
Hm, if that doesn't show his mindset, being from Utah and all...
Fortunately he didn't mention:
John(3:16)
-------
Warning: Slashdot may contain traces of nuts.
the system works!
Because he could've done it anonymously rather than using his account.
Isn't it funny that some time ago, Linux wasn't "good enough" for the enterprise, but nowadays, Linux is "evil" because it is too good and marginalizes the operating system as a revenue provider? I recall that a while ago, some f*wits at the SCO get-together complained that creating a compiler isn't profitable anymore, because of gcc.
Anyway, it seems like we are winning.
Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
simply because one day he says something and another day he says something else, and then he says he didn't mean what he said, and so forth, and so forth ... it's becoming so boring, really, why anyone should care about reading this staff is above and beyound me.
SCO Microsoft Linux MPAA RIAA MP3 Ogg Apple Open Source Closed Source Games Big Brother is Evil SCO Microsoft Linux MPAA RIAA MP3 Ogg Apple Open Source Closed Source Games Big Brother is Evil
Would you like some mayonnaise with that?
The unofficial
where he said some very interesting things
Like what?
The right questions weren't even asked... I mean when he's dodging the issue of showing the code by saying that they have to protect the IP of other companies, why not ask him to show just a few samples? I mean out of hundreds of thousands of lines of code, surely a few lines here and there wouldn't hurt anyone? Then at least we would know if their clames are true or (as we've seen with the leaks, probably) not.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Is a pretty smooth talker. He managed to almost always sound like he was saying something, even though he wasn't on quite a few occasions. Also, he only repeated himself about ten or twelve times.
And that's not an insult, not by a long-shot. It's damn hard not to be repetitive in a situation like that, and he held out pretty good.
Also, if I recall correctly, he distictively said SCO wasn't going after end users and Linux developers, just after IBM:
Of course, it's a little vague, but it's something.
He managed to dodge all the questions about if running a specific configuration was in any way a violation (On a single proc? On a handheld?). Also, he seemed to imply that Debian was clean.
Also, the protestors were very level-headed, which was good. They had good questions and pushed hard without being rude.
After all, where did the funds for this campaign come from ? Microsoft, HP & Sun licensing (Sun is seeing its marketshare destroyed by cheap Linux on Intel, but they're dead anyway)
Microsoft has a lot to gain from SCO spreading FUD for as long as possible. SCO's attempts to slow down the legal process is achieving precisely this. And Microsoft doesn't really care if they win or not - the battle for Server Marketshare is happenning NOW.
The Raven
Mp3 version of the transcript. So if you don't like ogg or you don't have an ogg player (like 99% of the popultaion) then listen to this version.
There's a mirror of the ogg here, should the original get slashdotted -- it's 17 megs.
you're fucking pathetic.
you're fucking annoying
jealous that you didn't think of the same thing? :-P
It features a man shouting "HEY EVERYB0DY, I'M L00KING AT GAY PORN0! Please mod down!
The Courts
UNIX
Software
Businesses
Operating Systems
News
Thank you sir! May I have another?
Wow. Darl sounds as if he almost has the oratory prowess of the Shrub!
Sir Haxalot is a known troll
Just what we need, another article pointing out the same thing we already know: SCO is full of shit.
Keep giving them the coverage they love so much. Keep letting SCO play you.
read his Posting History and see yourself
...or I might just be drunk. I think he makes the point that SCO is in the right to sue IBM if they consider themselves to have proof that IBM has put SCO code in linux. It makes sense to me that SCO does not intend to make this IP infringement known to anyone without signing a NDA. I don't think it would be any damage to SCO if they did, if they say that this is our IP and point it out doesn't mean they can sue the next company putting the same code in any other free or commercial product. Consider that the people that are switching from unix to linux are potential revenue loss for SCO, like those who are switching from MS Windows to linux are loss for MS. The end users (think companies here, not 3l337 haxx0r) that has never been using SCO Unix and uses linux now are not a loss to SCO. It is difficult for SCO to compete with operating systems that might have their code in them. I hope SCO wants to compete and be the choice of operating system because of it's features and services available. I think the linux community should ask IBM what code they have contributed that might be in violation of any contracts they may have with SCO. After all, you have to consider, SCO is a commercial company that seem to have lost revenue because of linux. If that revenue is lost because IBM has contributed SCO code to linux it is the executives right towards their shareholders to sue IBM, and anyone else that causes loss to them by stealing their IP. However it is damaging to linux, but who is responsible for the damage? If SCO is right, IBM is at fault and "could" be held responsible. Maybe they even should be held responsible. If I was a drugdealer and gave away alot of money for charity to look good, I would still be a drugdealer. I feel redundant, or just drunk. I should put this in my .sig, but hey, I am drunk... I'll do it tomorrow...
Gosh, because posting an article that might get slashdotted is sooo original. It's the oldest karma whore trick in the book.
not to bitch about ogg. People here don't like when you have a problem with their obscure formats. Screw usability or standards lets use some odd format unless it is Flash of course. People here don't visit the real world too often.
Than why are you here?
Sorry I know it is stating the obvious but if you hate it to that level why bother, or is this something you inflict on yourself.
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said: "I drank what?" - Chris Knight (Val Kilmer)- Real Genius
This one should be more easy to read. (there is a bug in slashcode :))
.sig, but hey, I am drunk... I'll do it tomorrow...
or I might just be drunk. I think he makes the point that SCO is in the right to sue IBM if they consider themselves to have proof that IBM has put SCO code in linux.
It makes sense to me that SCO does not intend to make this IP infringement known to anyone without signing a NDA. I don't think it would be any damage to SCO if they did, if they say that this is our IP and point it out doesn't mean they can sue the next company putting the same code in any other free or commercial product.
Consider that the people that are switching from unix to linux are potential revenue loss for SCO, like those who are switching from MS Windows to linux are loss for MS. The end users (think companies here, not 3l337 haxx0r) that has never been using SCO Unix and uses linux now are not a loss to SCO.
It is difficult for SCO to compete with operating systems that might have their code in them. I hope SCO wants to compete and be the choice of operating system because of it's features and services available.
I think the linux community should ask IBM what code they have contributed that might be in violation of any contracts they may have with SCO.
After all, you have to consider, SCO is a commercial company that seem to have lost revenue because of linux. If that revenue is lost because IBM has contributed SCO code to linux it is the executives right towards their shareholders to sue IBM, and anyone else that causes loss to them by stealing their IP.
However it is damaging to linux, but who is responsible for the damage? If SCO is right, IBM is at fault and "could" be held responsible. Maybe they even should be held responsible.
If I was a drugdealer and gave away alot of money for charity to look good, I would still be a drugdealer.
I feel redundant, or just drunk. I should put this in my
If linux has contained SCO source code and these companies have made commerical profits off of linux, then why isn't SCO entitled to some of that profit because these companies ilegally used their IP?
I also think it's true that at ONE point or possibly still, the linux source has contained source code taken from SCO. I don't believe the linux zealots FUD that this whole thing is a conspiracy and Darl McBride made up the whole thing to pump the stock price then bail out.
There is a segment of the linux community that absolutely disgusts me. These people expect SCO to point out the source code, so it can be removed and expect SCO to get nothing. While their source code was being used to sell commerical products and they don't get a penny of it? What is that bullshit?
Can you imagine the outrage if a commerical company secrectly used an open source projects software? But it's ok to steal from a company.
Note how Darl never, ever addresses the GPL issue directly. He never says, "in regards to the allegations of copyright violation in regards to distribution of the Linux kernel, which is protected by the GPL, from our server all this time..." or anything similar. Here's the only time he seems to address the issue of the GPL, though again he does not mention the GPL:
It seems that the phrase a distribution is not the same as a donation is an allusion to the fact that they are still distributing linux, but they don't seem to think that distributing the code under the GPL is the same as donating it.
Well, in a sense, Darl is correct. It's not donating it; it is making the code available for all to use under the terms of the GNU Public License which states some things quite clearly which demonstrate that SCO itself is releasing this code to us under the terms of the GPL, for such use as we see fit, so long as we accept the license.
(WHEREIN SCO cannot terminate our right to use their source code which they have themselves distributed under the GPL, within the linux kernel, even if SCO themselves does not follow the terms of the GPL...)
(WHEREIN SCO has agreed to the terms of the GPL, which as per the prior paragraph they cannot revoke, by distributing the code under the GPL...)
(WHEREIN SCO grants a further license for distribution to anyone and everyone, under the terms of the GPL...)
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I know... I'm just being a troll. :)
The Cast:
Darl: SCO CEO Darl McBride
P: Protester (the collective group, with various individuals asking questions)
C: Cameraman
Pleasant Grove Police Officer: Pleasant Grove Police Officer
-----------------
Darl: So, how's the day going?
P: Do you bite your thumb at us, sir?
Darl: Hey, what's the diliyo?
P: Do you quarrel, sir?
Darl: chill out dude, I was just saying hi.
P: If you do, sir, We are for you: we serve as good men as you.
Darl: y'all good people alright, and so are we.
P: You lie.
Darl: what are you saying man?
P: Draw, if you be men. Linus, remember thy swashing blow.
Darl: Holly fucking later day cows!
P: We do but keep the peace: put up thy sword, Or manage it to part these men with us.
Darl [rushes back into the HQ]: CLOSE THE DOOR, CLOSE THE DOOR.
P: What, drawn, and talk of peace! We hate the word,
As We hate hell, all SCO, and thee:
Have at thee, coward!
Let me paraphrase one section of this exchange:
"So, show us where Linux is in violation."
"No, we can't do that, because then we'd be revealing protected code, and then there would be a problem."
"So there's not a problem?"
"No, there is a problem, which is that there's SCO protected code in Linux."
"So if there's a problem, just tell us which code, and we can fix it."
"No, I can't do that, it would cause a problem."
This sounds like one of those loops that those AIs get into when talking to each other...
Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
<nimoy>His name is DAR-EL (dar-el) DAR-EL MC-BRIDE, greatest question dodger of them all!</nimoy>
Firstly, not wanting to be overly critical, but how long does it take to write-up an interview? Is an interview from June really all that relevant given the amount of stuff that's been posted on the topic in the meantime?
And secondly, is this the Andrew McNabb?
Yesterday (friday) I moved the site to Ibiblio... because the server couldn't cope with the Slashdot attack. (I planned to do it quitetly today.)
I heard several people ask "what is it like to have your server slashdotted?
It is NO FUN! You see the workload on your machine rise above 40; top slows to a crawl, and all kind of weird things are happening because your machine is:
- running out of processes
- running out of swap space
- running out of file descriptors
And it isn't able to perform its usual tasks.
I'm glad that we're at Ibiblio now!
extern warranty;
main()
{
(void)warranty;
}
Gotta love the way /. works
...someone needs to pipe up and ask him point-blank why he and his cronies have been dumping their stock.
I have to admit that Darl *sounds* like a nice guy in this tape. Note the emphasis, though.
A couple of big logical flaws that I haven't seen anyone else point out yet:
"A few years ago, our annual revenues were hundreds of millions of dollars. Now they're down to around fifty million." This *assumes* that SCO's revenues *would* have held steady, if it weren't for those darn kids and their mangy dog.
"We're not going after end-users, we're going after the big huge businesses - especially enterprise-class stuff". This *assumes* that SCO *would* have made meaningful enterprise-class revenue, if it weren't for etc.
McBride probably believes this point though, and he has to, otherwise his case falls apart and he opens the company -- and himself personally -- to all sorts of abuse and contempt charges.
He spouts the same McDonald's crap as seen in Halloween IX, but strangely enough, no "protestor" mentioned that the only McD use of SCO is in the cash registers, which have less power than my non-hacked, Palm023.1 Palm III handheld, which I use more than my iPAQ. This is OpenServer, which was once Microsoft Xenix. McDonald's is not using SCO in their datacenters, just in their cash registers.
McBride throws out the "high-scalability" buzzwords and is never correctly challenged by these "protestors", most of whom by their questions and responses appear to be anti-globalisationalists waiting for the next G-8 summit. Great questions from them included:
Not much to see here. Move along...Every time I see these stories in Slashdot and elsewhere, absolutely 100% of the replies are along the lines of "SCO is nuts, they have no chance, they just want to pump up their stock and cash out, etc etc". Sometimes I see things like "I'm a lawyer and I think they have no grounds but wierd things can happen in the legal system."
On the other hand their stock did go up so either the investors are idiots or we're missing something. Any time I'm discussing a topic like this with a group of people all of whom I agree with, I get a bit worried... What are we not hearing?
Is there *anybody* who knows about the case and is *not* on SCO's payroll who thinks there's some merit and SCO might not be thrown out of court, and might even win? If so I'd really like to see a posting from them.
Yep yep... Let's keep it going... :)
So, McBride is really Dilbert!
Litigious bastards
the real world can die, thanks.
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
a credible person indeed
Call me crazy here, but I got through about the first 3 minutes of the interview, and it started to sound *very* much like Catch-22. I'm dead serious. The Linux community is Yossarian and Darl is Doc. Anyone else see where I'm coming from here?
"Nature doesn't care how smart you are. You can still be wrong." - Richard Feynman
It takes time to get those articles properly formatted. Give the dog a bone.
Did any of these folks ever actually contribute to the kernel? That one guy asking McBride whether he had read the GPL was especially annoying.
Darl(21:50): It's reasonable, except when the comment codes are the same, the humor lines in the comment code are the same, and the typos in the comment code are the same, then you start getting beyond... Ya know, it was kind of like, I learned this one day at school ... It becomes more of the... Those, to me, are really the DNA of the code here.
So, SCO can't show the code because that would be giving away their IP... ok, how about showing us the COMMENTS that are exact duplicates so we can track down the true original source of the comments? I am a software developer/architect and I can tell you that I have never seen code commented so well that someone could take the comment alone and recreat the code that went with it!
Show us the comments Darl!
The Matrix is real... but I'm only visiting!
No way. I've got so many better things to do.
Darl McBride is using the stupid cliche, 'I could tell you but then I'd have to kill you" line. How trite!
Does he actaully believe that this will hold up in court? He's nuts! Because unless it is a matter of National Security, that code HAS to be displayed to a judge in trial. As soon as a judge sees the code, he's going to dismiss the case and might even indict SCO! They are playing a very dangerous game.
There has been no evidence that anybody has copied anything. SCO hasn't demonstrated anything or provided any facts to support their claim. When they tried, it was shown that their example was in public domain, or otherwise legally obtained code. Later, they retracted the claim from that example. Surely, if they have 100s of thousands of lines that they claim are infringing, they can show few to demonstrate that they actually have a valid claim. Again, they tried and were rebuked to a point where they had to retract their claims.
It's not a matter of what you think or what Darl thinks; it's the matter of factual evidence of which there has been none. And the one that they had produced (at the presentation) they have had to take their words back.
Actually, yes - SCO needs to provide evidence that infringement has occurred. The accusation is not a proof of anything. I can accuse IBM that they are infringing on my copyrights without providing any evidence - that does not mean I am entitled to $3 billion. Meanwhile, SCO gets nothing because they haven't shown any facts or proven anything in court or otherwise.
Yes, you are right, it is an outrage - SCO hasn't complied with the GPL license and, yet, feels free to distribute its own version of Linux - that is a gross copyright violation and a fact (something lacking from SCO's FUD). If SCO cannot comply to GPL's terms, then it has absolutely no rights to distribute software covered under it. In your own words, SCO is stealing Linux kernel code which it has no right to distribute other than under GPL, which SCO hasn't agreed to. SCO is, therefore, an IP thief. Notice, every time Darl gets asked about violating GPL (and quite a few times), he ignores the question, provides a one-line "we are fine" answer without any meaning, or simply changes the topic.
Nobody can be absolutely certain that there is no God. But even if there exists in your mind a remote chance that the Bible could be right and you will face His judgment some day, it seems irrational to me to piss Him off ahead of time for no reason. Why would a rational being do so?
Isn't it because, deep down, you just hate God? Romans 8 says that you do: it says that the mind of natural man is hostile to God (at war against Him). Jesus said, "If the world hates you, keep in mind that it has hated me before it hated you."
But if you will face ultimate judgement, wouldn't it be better to face a friend rather than an enemy? How much does it cost you to make a friend? Now may prove to be a good time to go back and re-read that Bible verse (John 3:16) very carefully.
Then stop feeding the troll. :-P
Heheh. I haven't listened to the audio transcript yet, but his persona does sound like that of Teacher from South Park!
'Gather round Linux Children, mmmmkay we're going to talk about court injunctions and the greediness of our school' mmmmkay
I can't listen to ogg files on my locked-down Win 98 box here at work, so having the mp3 was really helpful. Thank!
SCO
Irene KHAAAAAAN!
Hrm. I encountered that problem in kindergarden. Some annoying damn kid (you know, the one that always smelled funny and had snot pouring out of his nose constantly) named Larry (I think). Wouldn't leave me alone; he wanted to see my dick.
One day, he followed me into the restroom, and I went into the stall. He poked his head from underneath the divider, and I pissed on his face. Needless to say, he never bothered me again.
Yeah, that was a good memory. I need to piss on more faces.
Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
Nobody can be absolutely sure that SCO does not have a valid legal claim. If there even exists in your mind a remote chance that SCO's claims could be right, and you will face their judgement some day, it seems irrational to me to piss them off ahead of time for no reason. Why would a rational being do so?
[...]
But if you will face ultimate judgement, wouldn't it be better to face a friend rather than an enemy? It only costs you $699 per computer to make a friend?
On the other hand, where anyone can make such a claim without backing it up with fact, expecting faith-based royalty payments, I will piss them off all I can, which is far less than they deserve. There are a myriad of religions claiming authority through different Gods who we cannot simultaneously please, and a myriad of wannabe technology claim jumpers and we would be broke and our lives wasted to pay them all.
...because whatever SCO said in June, I'm sure they've changed their story many times since them. Maybe if the header was "SCO incoherent" but then I'd mark the article -1, Redundant.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Global Associated News also interviewed Darl McBride today.
I'm unclear on what the police were there for. It sounds to me as if they randomly barged in and asked if their assistance was needed. Why exactly were they there?
That said... I'm frankly not sure I'd have been willing to talk to protesters if I were McBride. He almost seemed as if he was trying to be friendly, although I'm not sure how many questions he actually answered. (It seems that he completely evaded answering most of them?)
I'm also confused... There are several times when someone asks some sort of question, and he replies with something that makes absolutely no sense, like "Thanks" or "Yes" (to a question that couldn't possibly be construed as yes or no). What was up with that?
________________________________________________
suwain_2
I don't mean to be a troll, but I'm going to. This attitude is a problem. 90+% of the world uses Windows with certain media formats. Want more uptake to Linux, then don't have this shitty attitude about a request for a reasonable format.
>(Sun is seeing its marketshare destroyed by cheap Linux on Intel, but they're dead anyway)
I certainly don't see that. Sun's mad hatter linux is poised to strike against Windows/MS Office. They have nothing to gain by damaging the reputation of linux and/or hurting the GPL. In fact, Sun has a lot to lose if SCO gets its way.
I really hate interruptive interviewers. They usually just spout off stuff to the choir, which means that it's nothing more than just redundant flaming.
I don't like McBride any more than the interviewer, but I want to make sure that McBride gets to make his statement. If I understand fully what he is trying to say, than I can formulate a better argument against him, otherwise my arguments are always going to fall short.
// file: mice.h
#include "frickin_lasers.h"
No, he's the PHB. Any more questions?
No... but considering that Joseph Smith was a racist and a fascist and Brigham Young was even more so, let me ask you this Daryl, how did you guys turn a Jewish Jesus into a White Nazi?
You're just a bunch of nice church going Anti-Christs.
It just occured to me that the correct open source solution to the SCO problem is for someone to develop an open source replacement for restaurant management.
That way, McDonalds franchises can enjoy an open source solution intead of purchasing SCO products. This seems to be Darl's favorite customer, he mentions them in nearly everytime he talks.
Develop open source solutions for SCO's top 3 cusmtomers and their stock price will go back where it belongs...
jeff
After following the SCO->IBM lawsuit for the past several months, it just occured to me how to demand that SCO itemize the code in the Linux kernel that is infringing on their IP:
IANAL, but doesn't it seem kinda funny that SCO is so concerned about the IP/source that is in the Linux kernel that they seem to think is there, yet they have not filed for an injuctive order halting sites from distributing the Linux kernel. I believe that this would represent a lack of concern for their IP, thus meaning that they have not clearly demonstrated that they are concerned with the 'trade secret' status of their supposed 'know how' in the UNIX environment.
If there is a lawyer out there that reads this comment (and is in a position to comment), please, please please tell me if this makes sense.
If IBM really stole SCO's code and put it in Linux, and that is damaging SCO's business, then the number one priority of SCO is to get that code out of Linux, so that it can stop damaging their business. They can then go and sue IBM for damages.
SCO is refusing to do the one step that would be absolutely vital to them if they want to stop this "damage" from any stolen IP. They must identify the exact code so it can be removed and thus mitigate their damages. Not doing so is proof that the stolen code is actually worthless to them.
You are absolutely right that SCO has the right to prove that IBM stole their code and the right to sue IBM for it. The problem with SCO is that has little or nothing to do with their actual actions. What SCO does is print press releases, apparently designed to convince idiot investors that either they are going to get paid by IBM or all Linux users, or that Microsoft will pay them.
You can't even argue the basic premise. If linux has used source from SCO why shouldn't SCO be compensated by those who have profited from their works? See you can't argue that.
Yes SCO will have to eventually present evidence of the infrigment when it goes through the legal system. But why in the fuck do you think YOU are the ones to DEMAND the terms of this process? SCO allegedly had their IP violated, they can proceed however they chose while its within the boundries of the legal system.
Whether or not SCO violated the GPL is not relevent to this discussion. If they did, then take them to court and that can be a separate discussion. Just more shit from the zealots coming up with anything under the sun to attack SCO.
I honestly don't care about this situation, it doesn't affect my life. I just see the typical slashdot herd mentality and get sick of the arrogance and lack of critical thought. In real life Darl McBride could be an asshole who would stab me in the back, he likely is, but I agree that if his claim is true, he should be compensated.
Man, I hate SCO, no matter whatever they say or how they behave.
AT&T did not invent Unix. Unix was not invented in a business plan, or on purpose, it was a great concept some engineers had that had a unique situation at AT&T that the firm could NOT market their OS. Not being able to sell Unix made it what it is. Without the Berkeley people, Unix wouldn't have become that important. And when able to, AT&T nearly killed Unix, only to be proven wrong by the courts when trying to claim the work of the Berkeley guys as their own.
SCO did not in any way add to the progress of Unix. They were always a closed-source vendor when they were a Unix vendor. They did not invent Linux either. Their claims and exploitation of the legal system try to exploit thousands of coders and deprive them of their work the same way AT&T tried to.
You simply must hate those guys. People who would rather see the commons die and wither than to exploit it any way less.
They have no patents. They try to claim ownership on code that clearly originates from BSD. They try to claim ownership of IBM and SGI code, not a bit from they did invent! IBM ported their contribution from OS/2. SGI ported their own code. Unix licenses seem to be only there to allow the owner of the copyright to rake in the work of others!
Man, I do hope Red Hat does succeed with their attempt to force SCO to lay their cards on the table, so we all will be able to see the emperor is naked and this FUD campaign to raise stock prices collapses!
It's finally time to give Unix back to all of its contributors, and not let it remain withering and dying in the hands of the technologically inept and morally corrupt.
I seriously doubt any non-BSD code of Unix is in Linux. But I think, that anything that is still salvageable and usable certainly belongs there. Had only Caldera open-sourced it when they were not just socket-puppets, then Unix would have been finally free!
Curse the short-sightedness of AT&T, USL, Novell, Caldera and SCO. We're all in the hands of corporate gangsters, that have no shame or respect for anything. We need to stop this cutthroat version of capitalism and establish at least some rules of conduct, bring back some fairness to economy and society.
The American way of plunder, pillage and burn will lead to disaster, be it to Unix/Linux, or be it to the world in its whole.
Make this fucker suffer !
/. herd mentality?`:) Let Darl be your shepherd.
Do you know what happens when a company starts to harass their own customers? That's basicly what SCO did by sending their 1500 customers 'the letter'. And, by distributing their own alleged code in 'their own' distribution, well... I suppose you get the drift by now.
"If Linux has used source from SCO why shouldn't they be compensated?"
*If* this is the case then yes they should be compensated.
It's most amusing that you are moaning about a /. herd mentality and decrying the lack of critical thought whilst simultaneously refusing to think about this whole SCO situation one bit and arrogantly shouting about your ill informed and sheep like agreement with everything Mr Mc Bride has said.
You add nothing of value to Slashdot. You are a pure karma whore and attention whore in one.
Fucking newbie idiot.
And stop posting as an AC to defend yourself.
And people usually open the article before reading the comments, so when your karma whoring takes effect, the site is already down.
And stop posting as an AC to defend yourself.
I got a bit confuseed there for a moment, that transcript was a little similar to an episode of the BOFH.
--Mods giveth, Mods taketh away--
"Do you know what happens when a company starts to harass their own customers?"
When the customers are addicted to the product, it would appear to increase revenue.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
The very fact that you take this accusation as a premise makes your whole argument irrelevant. No further comment.
When it comes down to it, what Darl said regarding "going after end-users" or not, will not mean jack shit, even if someone got it on tape. After all, was he really speaking in the capacity of an officer of SCO at the time, or merely stating his own opinion? Since he was not being deposited by a lawyer, SCO's lawyers will get that thrown out easily.
It sure sounded like he was talking for SCO in that interview, but when push comes to shove, end-users (especially people with a 5000- or 10000-seat support contract with IBM or RedHat, or significant server licenses with either) will be dragged into court.